










































■ 





















1:1 • • ■ I' 





















































































* 















































' • 1 | 


















r 

































































































































. V 



























• ■ 












































































































X 































































































































































HOUSING CONDITIONS 

IN THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL 





REPORT PRESENTED TO THE HOUSING 
COMMISSION OF THE ST. PAUL ASSOCIATION 

BY 

CAROL ARONOVICI Pk.D. 

DIRECTOR, OF SOCIAL SERVICE* ‘AMHERST H. WILDER CHARITY 












wii 


& 


D. of D. 
APR 5 1918 













Preface 


T HIS investigation was undertaken by the Amherst H. Wilder Charity Foun¬ 
dation at the suggestion of the St. Paul Association. The work was done 
under the personal direction of Dr. Carol Aronovici, whose experience and 
knowledge are attested to by more than two score communities throughout the 
country in which he has assisted in the study and improvement of conditions. 

The Housing Commission of the St. Paul Association has kept in constant 
touch with the work and its members have personally inspected many of the con¬ 
ditions referred to in this report. The statements made, we believe to be in con¬ 
formity with the facts, and we are fully in accord with the suggestions for im¬ 
provement. The Commission and its members will do all that is in their power 
to provide the necessary machinery for the removal of existing evils and remain 
at work until this machinery has proved its efficiency or has been supplanted by 
other and more efficient means of attaining the desired ends. 


COMMISSION. 


Stanley G. Miller, Chairman. 
Howard F. Ware, Vice-Chairman. 
Carol Aronovici, Director. 

E. F. MacDonough, Secretary. 


Mrs. David AberlE, 
Arthur S. Devor, 

Mrs. Albert R. Hall, 
JulE M. Hannaeord, Jr., 
Thomas G. Holyoke, 
Geo. W. Lawson, 
Gustavus Loevinger, 

Dr. Eugene L. Mann, 


Gertrude F. Murrell, 


Louis F. Nienaber, 
Fred H. RomEr, 


Mrs. I. L. Rypins, 
James H. Skinner, 


Frank E. Whitman, 
Wm. S. Williams. 








Contents 


Preface . 3 

Introduction.7 

Housing Survey.9 

Condition of Repair . .18 

Toilets and Baths.25 

Sewers and Water Supply .36 

Garbage, Ashes and Rubbish.38 

Lighting and Ventilation.42 

Lodger Problem .51 

The Lodging, Rooming Houses and Hotels.56 

Valuation of Properties and Revenues.64 

Relation Between Housing and Other Social Conditions . . 68 

Achievements to Date.70 

Conclusions.74 

Recommendations.76 

Analysis of Laws in Cities and States Throughout the Country 81 
Proposed Ordinances.101 














Introduction 


Citizens of Saint Paul who expected the re¬ 
sults of the Housing Survey to be startling in 
its revelation of conditions will be disap¬ 
pointed no less than will the complacent busi¬ 
ness man and the professional booster, who 
believe that all is well relative to the safety, 
comfort and sanitation of the working people 
of this city. 

It must be stated at the outset that the 
housing evils in this City are no worse and 
no better than are the evils found in most of 
the rapidly growing cities of this country. The 
measure of the quality of our local patriotism 
is not to be measured by the extent of the evils 
which we have tolerated through ignorance, 
but by the rapidity with which we improve 
conditions once they are known and the means 
of removing them made clear. 

This Survey of Housing conditions in the 
City of St. Paul was undertaken by the Wild¬ 
er Charity in the belief that new and more ef¬ 
fective housing legislation is necessary, and 
that through the instrumentality of the Hous¬ 
ing Commission of the St. Paul Association 
and with the co-operation of City officials, con¬ 
scious of the seriousness of the existing evils, 
such legislation and machinery for its en¬ 
forcement would be secured without unneces¬ 
sary delay. 

The information gathered in the course of 
the Survey, while not covering the whole of 
the city, relates to the homes of over 21,000 


people whose living conditions are of suffi¬ 
cient moment to demand attention. That lim¬ 
itation of time and the exorbitant cost of a 
complete survey of the community have made 
it necessary to confine our observations to 
specific areas will be evident to those familiar 
with undertakings of this kind. The best con¬ 
ditions will not receive much attention in this 
report, and we fear that some of the worse 
evils have escaped our observation. The evi¬ 
dence that we have been able to gather, how¬ 
ever, is of sufficient extent and seriousness to 
command public attention. 

It is to be hoped that the citizens of St. 
Paul will not take the unpleasant facts re¬ 
vealed in this report as intended to disparage 
either the potential or actual merits of St. 
Paul as an industrial and residential center, 
but that they will see it as a diagnosis of such 
pathological, social, and sanitary conditions as 
the average citizen is likely to overlook to the 
detriment of his community, with disastrous 
effects upon the people affected. 

In so far as existing legislation and avail¬ 
able machinery for its enforcement permit, a 
considerable number of specific evils have 
been removed through the instrumentality of 
the local Department of Health. The main 
task, however, remains to be accomplished 
through the concerted efforts of the Munici¬ 
pal Council and the various City Depart¬ 
ments. 


7 
















The undersigned wishes to express to the 
Housing Commission of the St. Paul Associa¬ 
tion his gratitude for their earnest co-opera¬ 
tion in the carrying on of the survey, and 
especially for the work done in the shaping- up 
of the proposed Housing Ordinance. 


The writer also wishes to express his indebt¬ 
edness to the staff of field workers who gave 
their services at a time when such work is most 
difficult. They proved themselves vitally in¬ 
terested in their task and rendered most effi¬ 
cient service. 

CAROL ARONOVICI. 



Rear lot homes 




Housing Survey 

General Considerations 

PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION. 


This survey was carried on primarily for 
the purpose of revealing to the public sanitary 
conditions that may be a menace to the health 
of the residents of the poorer sections of the 
city with a view to stimulating more efficient 
service on the part of the municipality in the 
control of existing evils. This primary ob¬ 
ject is, however, neither fundamental nor far 
reaching. The prevention in the future of 
the development of similar conditions by 
proper legislative control, and the pointing 
out of the error of the past that proved nei¬ 
ther economical to the individual builder nor 

FIELD 

It was realized at the beginning that a com¬ 
plete survey of the housing conditions of the 
entire population was neither necessary nor 
practicable because of the enormous expense, 
the long delay, the difficulty of obtaining suf¬ 
ficient workers capable of doing the work, and 
the large proportion of houses that represent 
a high standard of housing and sanitation. It 
is also clear that there are in every community 
certain typical evils and defects which come 
to light in any housing* inquiry if the field is 
selected with sufficient care to be representa¬ 
tive. In the last analysis social diagnosis con¬ 
cerns itself with the ascertaining and meas¬ 
urement of abnormal, undesirable conditions, 
rather than with the evolution of the desirable 
and normal. 

With this point of view in mind certain sec¬ 
tions of the City were selected. They are 
shown in Map No. I and cover an area of 
about 30 blocks with a population of 21,000. 


promotive of the best interest of the City, are 
of far greater importance than the palliative 
remedial work, that conditions revealed by 
our investigation, may stimulate. 

Should St. Paul become aware of the need 
for a city-wide housing policy of a construc¬ 
tive character, and hasten to translate this 
awareness into constructive housing by means 
of amenable and necessary legislative meas¬ 
ures, that will promote rather than restrict 
building of high standard, our purpose shall 
have been accomplished, and the future of 
St. Paul as a residence community assured. 

COVERED. 

We are aware that there are other districts 
in this City which should have been made the 
subject of investigation if our aim was to be 
purely a checking up of the work of the 
Health and other departments concerned wftli 
the health and safety of our people. Our 
task, however, was merely the application of 
an efficiency test to given districts most in 
need of efficient service, and not a complete 
inspection of conditions throughout the entire 
community which is the duty of the local gov¬ 
ernmental agencies. 

The area covered by this investigation was 
divided into eighteen districts. After some 
preliminary investigation, districts V, VI, VII, 
XIII, were eliminated because the conditions 
found did not warrant a thorough house to 
house investigation, although some conception 
of the conditions were formed from a super¬ 
ficial investigation in the districts that we did 
not cover by a house to house canvas. The 
eighteen districts may be described as follows: 


General Consideration 


District 

Ward 

Descriptive Title 

I 

6 

West Side Lower Levee 

II 

6 

West Side Lower Flats 

III 

6 

West Side Upper Levee 

IV 

6 

West Side Upper Flats 

V 

4 

Upper Plateau . . . . . 

VI 

4 

Principal Retail District 

VII 

3 

Principal Wholesale District 

VIII 

3 

Old Lower Town and R. R. Yards 

IX 

1 

Williams St. and Vicinity . 

X 

1 

Collins St. and Vicinity . 

XI 

2 

Phalen Creek (Swede Hollow) . 

XII 

9 

Upper Broadway and Vicinity 

XIII 

9 

State Capitol and Vicinity 

XIV 

8 

West of Rice and North of G. N. Ry. 

XV 

9 

East of Rice and North of G. N. Ry. 

XVI 

8 

Farrington Ave.—Como to Carroll 

XVII 

5 

West Seventh St. to River 

XVIII 

5 

Upper Levee (under High Bridge) 


Boundaries 

East of Wabasha and North of Fairfield. 

East of Wabasha between Fairfield and C. G. W. Ry. . 
North of Fairfield from Wabasha southwesterly to city limits, 
West of Wabasha between Fairfield and Prospect Terrace. 
Jackson, Summit, Fourth and Eagle (except District VI). 
Jackson, Eighth, St. Peter and Mississippi River. 

Jackson, Eighth, Pine and Union Depot Tracks. 

Jackson, Grove and R. R. Tracks (except District VII). 
Grove, Mississippi, G. N. Ry. and Soo Tracks. 

Surrounded by R. R. Tracks (G. N., Omaha and N. P.). 
Between N. P. (Duluth Line) and Bluff. 

Mississippi, Grove?, Jackson and G. N. Ry. Tracks. 

Rice, Summit, Jackson and G. N. Ry. Tracks. 

Farrington, Rice, Hatch and Atwater Sts. 

Rice, Lyten, Oakland Cemetery, Cortland and Acker. 

-Both sides of Farrington. 

-Eagle St. to Omaha Shops. 

-Between Bluff and River. 


TIME. 


The time consumed in carrying on the field 
work was a little less than 3 months, beginning 
about April 15th and ending about the 1st of 
July. This gave the field workers an oppor¬ 
tunity to see conditions during the most try¬ 
ing periods of the year, and during the sum¬ 
mer when cleaning up and emergency repairs 
can be made without encountering climatic* 
difficulties. That throughout the entire pe¬ 
riod of field investigation many nuisances 
were found that should have been removed 
without delay will be shown in the later parts 
of this report. 

The question as to whether these trying 
times of international complication and war 
emergencies were opportune for the consider- 

LEGISLATION AND LAW 

A study of the amount and character of 
legislation available for the control of housing 
conditions and an examination of the machin¬ 
ery for the enforcement of whatever legisla¬ 
tion does exist proved to us beyond a question 
that both need reorganization and radical 
change. St. Paul conditions should therefore 
not be laid at the door of the local city officials 


ation of local, and from the international 
point of view, minor issues, has sometimes 
been raised in connection with this survey. 
The only pertinent answer to this question is 
that as the waste of human life in war in¬ 
creases and comes closer to our own national 
life, the higher rises the value of our human 
resources. Good housing is fundamental to 
good health, decent surroundings are essen¬ 
tial to patriotism, warfare depends upon both. 
Can any one question the efficiency of hous¬ 
ing reform as a war measure, especially as 
the length of the struggle seems to show no 
signs of coming to a speedy end? Healthy, 
efficient, patriotic men will be needed—they 
cannot be raised in the slums. 

ENFORCEMENT. 

entrusted with the enforcement of legislation, 
but to the neglect on the part of the legisla¬ 
tive bodies, State and City, and in the last 
analysis, upon the citizens who so far have 
failed to recognize the needs of this commu¬ 
nity for better and more constructive methods 
of dealing with the housing of the people. 


10 




CITY PLANNING 


The most drastic housing legislation can 
not be entirely effective without comprehen¬ 
sive city planning of a constructive character. 
The facilities for obtaining the maximum 
amount of light and air, the economical use 
of land without hindrance to requirements of 
safety, sanitation, convenience, or permanency 
of investment, are problems of city planning 
that housing legislation in its ordinarily ac¬ 
cepted interpretation cannot cope with. 

St. Paul has already established a zoning- 
system which protects the owners of dwell¬ 
ings against deterioration of values due to 
failure to segregate industrial and commer¬ 
cial activities. Some effort is also being made 
to protect strictly residential areas against en¬ 
croachment through construction of tene¬ 
ments, apartments or apartment hotel build¬ 
ings which are out of keeping with the char¬ 
acter of the neighborhoods which they are at¬ 
tempting to invade. 

That a considerable task along the lines of 
developing a consistent policy of city planning 
is still to be added to the present scheme of 
community development that both public and 
private agencies are engaged upon, is evident 
to any one examining the map of the City of 
St. Paul. 

This report does not pretend to deal with 
the problems of city planning except as they 
relate directly to the area studied and affect 
the types of building that come under our ob¬ 
servation. A careful survey of city planning- 
problems should be a direct corollary of this 
investigation. 


The sections generally known as “Swede 
Hollow” and the “Flats,” which constitute the 
lowest types of residential districts not only in 
St. Paul but of many cities that it has been 
the writer’s privilege to examine, offer re¬ 
markable opportunities for replanning. The 
complete wiping out of the former district 
would afford a most unusual opportunity for 
the development of a park area which would 
serve as a breathing space for a district grow¬ 
ing- in congestion and in need of open space. 

Phalen Creek and the banks of this stream 
are ideal for park purposes, while in their 
present state they constitute a menace to the 
health of the residents and to the community 
at large. 

The “Flats” if properly treated would af¬ 
ford a splendid opportunity for the develop¬ 
ment of an industrial zone accessible to rail 
and river transportation instead of being what 
they are today, a slum of the worst character. 

The entire city needs a constructive plan, 
but the elimination of the slums and the re¬ 
districting of the city to meet the housing and 
industrial needs of the wage earners and poor¬ 
er elements of the population, should take pre¬ 
cedence over the construction of costly public 
buildings, the development of improving thor¬ 
oughfares, the building of boulevards de¬ 
signed for the automobile tourist, the opening 
up of park areas in districts undeveloped and 
inaccessible sections of the City. These things, 
while desirable, should not take precedence 
over the immediate needs for the improve¬ 
ment of the living conditions of the people. 


POPULATION. 


In the study of housing conditions much is 
frequently attributed to the methods of living- 
in vogue among the occupants of the dwell¬ 
ings examined. The “foreigner” is generally 
made the excuse for existence of housing evils, 
and the trite stories about the potatoes in the 
bath tub or the goat in the parlor are related 
with much satisfaction and with no little suc¬ 


cess in postponing- legislation and avoiding or 
delaying law enforcement. The same kind of 
reasoning was used in New York City at the 
time when slum conditions were created by 
a large increase in German and Irish popu¬ 
lation thirty or forty years ago, as is used 
throughout the whole country against the 
Italian, the Pole, the Armenian, or any other 


11 


< 

X 


z 

z 

5 


D 

£ 


>3 

o> 

>* 

W 

> 

si 

S3 

xfl 

w 


J B 

O 


w 

X 
. H 

H x 

if] £ 

Q 

w 

J 

S 

o 

U 




12 












































































































































































13 







































































































nationality that prevails in a given commu¬ 
nity, for which no adequate provisions have 
been made by those who are most in need ot 
foreign labor or by the booster who points with 
pride to inflated census figures of population, 
and shuts his eyes to the growing slum and 
its ally, a high criminality and death rate. 

The following figures relate to the nation¬ 
ality of the population residing in the area 
studied in the course of this investigation re¬ 
garding which accurate data was obtained: 

Table I. Distribution of Population Stud¬ 
ied According to Nationality of Parents or 
Heads of Families, Exclusive of Lodgers. 



Number of 

Per Cent 

Nationality 

People 

Total 

Jews 

2,809 

15.22 

Americans 

2,323 

12.62 

Germans 

2,251 

12.22 

Scandinavians 

2,023 

10.98 

Italian 

1,115 

6.06 

Irish 

966 

5.25 

Russian 

899 

4.84 

Poles 

550 

2.99 

French 

528 

2.87 

Negroes 

378 

2.05 

Bohemians 

226 

1.24 

Syrians 

220 

1.19 

English 

209 

1.15 

Roumanians 

191 

1.05 

Hungarians 

103 

0.57 

Scotch 

86 

0.48 

Mixed or indefinite 

3,548 

19.22 

Total 

18,425 

100.00 

itionality of the family 

is based upon the country of 


birth of both parents, except in the case of the Jews. 


If we eliminate the 3,548 of mixed and un¬ 
known nationalities we find that out of a total 
of 14,877 people, 5,397, or 36.2 per cent, were 
either American or of nationalities ordinarily 
considered as of desirable character such as 
Germans, French, English and Scotch. That 
the ordinary conditions of neglect, misuse or 
abuse of property found in the course of our 
investigation may be laid upon the methods 
of living of the tenants is the contention that 
is ordinarily accepted by the general public, 
and in some instances is justifiable. The fact, 
however, that such defects as poor lighting, 
fire hazard, lack of sewer facilities, land 
sweating and other similar conditions which 
are purely structural, have been permitted by 
law, and the buildings were, in 92 per cent of 
the cases where information was available, 
older than 10 years, would seem to indicate 
that the failure of the State and local govern¬ 
ment to provide adequate control of buildings 
and necessary provisions for its enforcement, 
is clearly the responsibility of the people who 
determine at the polls the standards of safety 
and sanitation under which they desire to 
have the people of the City, native and for¬ 
eign, live. 


Mixed ot Indefinite 

Jetus 

Americans 

Ger mans 

Scandinavians 

Italian 

Irish 

Ru solan 

Poles 

Trench 

Negroes 

Bohemians 

Syrians 

English 

Roumanians 

Hungarians 

Scotch 

Tofdl 


a <aq 



o o o -a 

T&Uyllc 


CjpCO 



C.OCO 

z,zs\ 



Z.OZ3 

" 


1.1 IS 

* 


966 

- 


399 

* 


£60 

* 


528 

* 


376 

• 

mzamm i 

ZZ6 

♦ 


220 

• 

P'T ^ — 

2 09 

* 

ITTT--— 

\9\ 

* 

IT' r — 

103 

* 

[532S1 

86 

* 

nrSOBi 

18.425 

- 



Distribution of Population According to Nationality of Heads of Families. 


14 













OWNERSHIP AND SIZE OF FAMILIES. 


Not infrequently the proportion of families 
owning their own homes determines the ex¬ 
tent of neglect and lack of sanitary conditions 
in a community or a given district. The fol¬ 
lowing Table shows the frequency of owner¬ 
ship according to nationality of the head of 
the family: 

Table II. Showing number and per cent of 
rented and owned dwellings by nationality. 


Renters Owners 


Nationality 

No. 

Percent 

No. 

Percent 

American 

410 

76.27 

129 

23.73 

German 

284 

60.78 

182 

39.22 

Scandinavian 

314 

70.36 

132 

29.64 

Jewish 

202 

56.56 

155 

43.44 

Irish 

151 

73.67 

54 

26.33 

Italian 

135 

58.18 

97 

41.82 

Negro 

96 

82.76 

20 

17.24 

French 

82 

80.32 

20 

19.68 

Russian 

73 

71.56 

29 

28.44 

Polish 

63 

68.49 

29 

31.51 

English 

41 

87.24 

6 

12.76 

Syrian 

29 

74.36 

10 

25.64 

Bohemian 

21 

42.00 

29 

58.00 

Roumanian 

29 

72.50 

11 

27.50 

Hungarian 

16 

69.58 

7 

30.42 

Scotch 

18 

81.82 

4 

18.18 

Mixed 

542 

72.49 

206 

27.51 

TOTAL 

2,506 

68.90 

1,120 

31.10 


These figures show that in order of their 
proportion of ownership the nationalities rep¬ 
resented, the Jews, the Italians, the Germans 
and the Scandinavians have the largest num¬ 
ber of home owning families. Among the na¬ 
tionalities of which more than 100 families 
were studied, the French and the Negroes 
only showed a smaller proportion of home 


owning families than the Americans. That 
many of the Americans capable of owning 
homes have been driven out of these districts 
with the encroachment of the foreigners is a 
well determined fact. 

The size of the family is another element 
that frequently determines the congestion and 
the attending evils of congestion. In order 
to ascertain to what extent the size of the 
family may reasonably be attributed as a 
cause of the bad sanitary conditions found, 
we have analyzed the data gathered with the 
following results: 

Table III. Showing number and per cent of 
rented and owned dwellings by size of fami¬ 
lies. 


Renters Owners Total 


Size of 


Per¬ 


Per¬ 


Per¬ 

Families 

No. 

cent 

No. 

cent 

No. 

cent 

1-2 

505 

71.39 

203 

28.61 

708 

100 

3-4 

717 

75.44 

232 

24.56 

949 

100 

5-6 

358 

62.65 

214 

37.35 

572 

100 

7-8 

134 

53.73 

115 

46.27 

249 

100 

9-10 

40 

56.98 

53 

43.02 

93 

100 

Over 10 

10 

83.33 

2 

16.67 

12 

100 

TOTAL 

1,764 

68.28 

819 

31.72 

2,583 



The above figures show that out of a total 
of 2,583 families only 354, or 13.71 per cent, 
were of more than six persons or four chil¬ 
dren and the parents. It is also clear that the 
families of the renters were larger than those 
of owners since only 184 out of a total of 1,764 
or 10.43 per cent, were of more than six per¬ 
sons while there were 170 out of a total of 819 
families or 20.76 per cent, home owning fam¬ 
ilies with more than six persons per family. 


SIZE OF HOUSES. 


The number of rooms is the only index of 
the size of apartments and is in a sense a 
measure of the tendency towards congestion. 
In order to ascertain the distribution of the 
various sizes we have distributed the various 
apartments according to number of rooms 


and have separated the apartments in multi¬ 
ple dwellings from those in single dwellings. 

Table IV. gives the distribution of apart¬ 
ments according to number of rooms in sin¬ 
gle and multiple dwellings: 


15 


Table IV. Showing Distribution of Single 
and Multiple Dwellings According to Number 
of Rooms. 


No. 

Multiple Dwellings 

Single Dwellings 

Rooms 

Number 

Percent 

Number 

Percent 

1 . 

59 

2.49 

4 

.21 

£ 

15$ 

6.48 

38 

2.01 

3 

409 

17.31 

156 

8.26 

4 

934 

39.55 

362 

19.23 

5 

553 

23.42 

424 

22.45 

6 

187 

7.92 

399 

21.19 

7 

42 

1.78 

235 

12.46 

8 

17 

.72 

151 

8.01 

9 

3 

.13 

54 

2.86 

10 

2 

.08 

24 

1.27 

11 



21 

1.13 

12 

2 

.08 

6 

.31 

13 



6 

• 31 

14 



1 

.05 

15 





16 

1 

.04 



17 



2 

.10 

18 





19 



1 

.05 

20 



2 

.10 

Total 

2,362 

100.00 

1,886 

100.00 

Table IVa. 

Showing Number of Persons 


in Single and Multiple Dwellings According 
to Number of Rooms. 

Multiple Single 



Dwellings 

Dwellings 

Total 

No. 

No. 

Per¬ 

No. 

Per¬ 

No. 

Per¬ 

Rooms 

Persons 

cent 

Persons 

cent 

Persons 

cent 

1 

116 

1.26 

8 

.08 

124 

.65 

2 

331 

3.67 

144 

1.45 

475 

2.42 

3 

1,272 

14.11 

548 

5.56 

1,820 

9.65 

4 

3,286 

36.44 

1,583 

16.09 

4,869 

25.81 

5 

2,617 

29.10 

2,056 

20.84 

4,973 

24.68 

6 

988 

10.94 

2,080 

21.18 

3,068 

16.50 

7 

222 

2.46 

1,400 

14.22 

1,622 

8.59 

8 

126 

i:as 

996 

10.13 

1,122 

5.95 

9 

18 

.20 

399 

4.06 

417 

2.21 

10 

11 

.12 

220 

2.23 

231 

1.22 

11 



187 

1.90 

187 

.99 

12 

20 

.21 

74 

.75 

94 

.49 

13 



64 

.65 

. .64 

.34 

14 



15 

.15 

15 

.08 

15 







16 

To 

.11 



10 

,05 

17 



34 

.34 

34 

.18 

18 







19 



23 

.23 

23 

.12 

20 



14 

.14 

14 . 

, .07 

Total 

9,017 

100.00 

9,845 

100.00 

18,862 

100.00 


The above figures (Table IV) show that 
out of the 4248 apartments studied 1886 or 
44,44 per cent were single family houses and 
2362 or 55.56 per cent were multiple dwell¬ 
ings. This prevalence of multiple dwellings 
in the poorer districts of the city deserves fur¬ 


ther attention because of the present tendency 
toward a smaller number of rooms per apart¬ 
ment in the multiple dwellings than in the sin¬ 
gle dwellings. This is evidenced by the fact 
that in proportion to the total number of each 
type of building there were almost four times 
as many one and two room apartments in mul¬ 
tiple dwellings (8.95 per cent) as compared 
with the number of one and two room apart¬ 
ments in single dwellings (2.22 per cent). If 
we consider the three room apartments, there 
were more than twice as many such apart¬ 
ments in the multiple as compared with the 
single dwellings. On the whole, the figures 
show that there were far more apartments 
with less than four rooms in the multiple 
dwellings (26.24 per cent) as compared with 
the number of apartments with less than four 
rooms in single dwellings (11.04 per cent). 
If we. go a step further and include apart¬ 
ments with four rooms we find the same dis¬ 
proportion between multiple dwellings (65.65 
per cent) as compared with individual dwell¬ 
ings (30.27 per cent). 

Accepting on trial the fact that rooms in 
multiple dwellings are smaller, with lower 
ceilings and usually with less access to light 
or facilities for ventilation, the disproportion 
of apartments with four or less rooms would 
seem to indicate that the multiple dwelling is 
not desirable as a means of increasing the ex¬ 
tent of privacy or avoiding congestion in our 
houses. 

This larger proportion of apartments with 
less than four or five rooms, while indicative 
of a certain tendency towards reducing the 
available rooms per family, unfortunately does 
not prove quite as advantageous when we con¬ 
sider the number of rooms per person in the 
apartments of less than five rooms in single as 
compared with multiple dwellings. The fig¬ 
ures show that 5003 persons in multiple dwel¬ 
lings occupied apartments of less than five 
rooms. The total number of rooms in these 
apartments was 5328 or 106.4 rooms for every 
hundred persons, while in the case of single 
dwellings' 2183 persons lived in 2004 rooms 
located in' apartments of less than five rooms 
or only 93.6 rooms for every hundred persons. 


ic 











On first consideration it would seem to in¬ 
dicate a greater tendency toward congestion 
in individual dwellings but the average size of 
the rooms, the larger kitchens which are often 
used as dining and sitting rooms, and the bet¬ 
ter lighting and ventilation that prevails in 
the single dwellings as compared with the mul¬ 
tiple dwellings would more than offset the 
smaller proportion of rooms per hundred per¬ 
sons in single dwellings with less than five 


rooms. When we consider the total popula¬ 
tion in relation to the total number of rooms 
occupied we find that there is practically no 
difference between the single and multiple 
dwellings; the former having 107.5 rooms per 
100 persons and the latter 107.4 rooms per 
100 persons. It is clear that no great conges¬ 
tion exists and that altho some instances of 
serious crowding were found, they were limited 
mainly to abnormal dependent families with 
low standards of living. 


ROOM OCCUPANCY BY DISTRICTS. 


In the study of room occupancy it becomes 
clear that the difference in the amount of con¬ 
gestion must be considered both on the basis 
of total rooms and room occupied for sleep¬ 
ing purposes. It is also evident that there 
is a marked difference in the average number 
of persons per room in the various districts 
studied. 

Table V. Distribution of Average Room 
Occupancy According to Type of Dwelling in 
Relation to Total Rooms and Sleeping Rooms 
per Apartment by Districts Studied. 

Average No. Persons Per Room 



Single 

Dwellings 

Multiple Dwellings 

District 

Rooms 

Bed Rooms 

Rooms 

Bed Rooms 

I 

1.10 

2.07 

1.08 

2.18 

II 

1.03 

1.95 

1.07 

2.09 

III 

1.12 

2.35 

.90 

2.13 

IV 

.84 

1.81 

.99 

2.01 

VIII 

.99 

1.50 

.91 

1.69 

IX 

.83 

1.42 

1.01 

1.84 

X 

.84 

1.61 

.85 

1.95 

XI 

1.17 

2.05 

.81 

1.98 

XII 

.91 

1.84 

1.04 

2.15 

XIV 

.87- 

1.87 

.85 

1.88 

XV 

.85 

1.74 

.99 

2.24 

XVI 

.77 

1.68 

.84 

1.60 

XVII 

.99 

1.98 

.94 

2.20 

XVIII 

1.37 

2.55 

1.55 

2.74 


The average occupancy of rooms and bed¬ 
rooms in single and multiple dwellings as 
shown by the above table indicates clearly that 
while the difference in room occupancy is not 
materially different between the single and 
multiple dwellings, the bed rooms are more 
congested in the case of the multiple dwellings 
in all but three districts. The differences 
even in these districts are slight and the 
character of the neighborhoods either scat¬ 
tered or old residence areas that have become 
deteriorated such as the Phalen Creek dis¬ 
trict. These figures further emphasize the 
fact that while in point of numbers the rooms 
in multiple dwellings are more numerous, 
their use is so fixed as to make bedrooms avail¬ 
able for sleeping purposes only and that these 
rooms are not in sufficient numbers to avoid 
congestion to the extent shown by the sin¬ 
gle dwellings. An examination of the map on 
page 12 which shows the character of each 
district clearly indicates that the degree of 
bedroom congestion is closely related to the 
character of the neighborhood. 


17 


Condition of Repair 


EXTERIOR CONDITION. 


It is not possible to state in any definite 
form the condition of repair of buildings in a 
manner that would convey a notion in keep¬ 
ing with any particular standard. We might 
have used a system of scoring but while the 
margin of error may have been reduced some¬ 
what under this system the scale would not 
have been applied by the workers with any 
greater degree of accuracy than the ordinary 


classification of good, fair, and bad. To pre¬ 
tend statistical accuracy where there is no ac¬ 
cepted uniform standard of measurement is 
not advisable. The relation bettween the num¬ 
ber of families and the condition of repair is 
ordinarily well defined where the age of the 
buildings averages the same. Table VI shows 
this relationship. 


Table VI. Showing State of Outside Repair of Bldgs. According to No. of Families Occupying. 


No. 


Good 


Fair 


Bad 

No Information 

Families 

No. 

Percent 

No. 

Percent 

No. 

Percent 

No. 

Percent 

1 

671 

33.85 

688 

34.6 

327 

16.65 

298 

14.9 

2 

282 

36.94 

254 

33.47 

105 

13.96 

117 

15.63 

3 

37 

33.64 

41 

37.27 

20 

18.18 

12 

10.91 

4 

53 

50.46 

25 

23.81 

16 

15.24 

11 

10.49 

5 

8 

38.08 

4 

19.05 

5 

23.81 

4 

19.06 

6 

3 

13.63 

10 

45.45 

6 

27.28 

3 

13.64 

7 

3 

33.34 

2 

22.22 

2 

22.22 

2 

22.22 

8 

1 

50 

1 

50 





9 

2 

50 





2 

50 

No Inf. 

24 

38.08 

11 

17.46 

12 

19.07 

16 

25.39 

Total 

1,084 

35.22 

1,036 

33.64 

493 

16.03 

465 

15.11 


There was a total of 1084 or 35.22 per cent, 
buildings in good condition of repair, 1036 or 
33.64 per cent, in fair condition and 493 or 
16.03 per cent, in bad condition of repair. 
Where the information was not stated with 
any degree of accuracy it was not tabulated. 

The most striking fact about the above fig¬ 
ures is the large proportion of buildings in 
good repair in structures occupied by four 
families. This is of course, due not to any 
special virtue of this type of building, but to 
the fact that a large share of the four family 
tenements is of recent construction, as can be 
seen from the records of the Building Depart¬ 
ment, and has therefore not had time to dete¬ 
riorate to the same extent that other build¬ 
ings have deteriorated without receiving the 
necessary repairs. 


The elimination of the buildings regarding 
which information was not given will increase 
the proportion of buildings in good repair. 
It also becomes clear that the proportion 
of buildings in good repair occupied by one 
family constitute 39.84 per cent, of all build¬ 
ings of this type instead of 33.85 per cent, and 
in the case of two family buildings the pro¬ 
portion of houses in good repair increases 
from 36.94 per cent, to 43.99 per cent, of the 
total houses of this type. Throughout our 
experience in the present investigation the 
one family dwellings were invariably repre¬ 
sented by buildings of earlier construction in 
greater proportion than the multiple dwellings, 
unless the latter were originally intended as 
single dwellings and had been altered more re¬ 
cently for occupancy by more than one family. 


18 


Our observation throughout this study 
has proved conclusively that alterations for the 
purpose of increasing the number of families 
for which the building is intended, without ma¬ 
terially increasing the capacity or the sanitary 
conveniences of the building, is most dan¬ 
gerous from a sanitary and moral point of 
view, and represents in this city the worst 
type of dwellings. 

CONDITION OF REl 

The necessities brought about by conges¬ 
tion of buildings in the line of safety and fire 
protection have compelled many cities to cre¬ 
ate fire zones and restrict wood construction 
to certain areas outside the densely settled dis¬ 
tricts of our cities. 

While certain fire zones exist in the City of 
St. Paul, and a certain amount of brick and 
stone construction is to be found both in new 
and old buildings 2474 or 80.44 per cent, out of 
a total of 3078 buildings studied are of frame 


The tendency in legislation in the cities of 
this country has been to exercise a very lim¬ 
ited control over reconstruction of houses and 
a very considerable control, where control ex¬ 
ists, over new construction. This has made 
it possible for enterprising individuals to pur¬ 
chase old small buildings and by some slight 
changes and improvements place, two, three 
or more families in buildings intended for 
only one family. 

R AND MATERIAL. 

construction; the other buildings being mainly 
brick with a few stucco and stone structures. 

That the whole system of fire zoning which 
limits itself to specific geographic areas in¬ 
stead of types of structure and density of 
buildings often works hardship and does not 
encourage low cost construction of one family 
houses is certain. 

That the condition of repair of the build¬ 
ings is largely dependent upon the kind of 
material is evident from the following table: 


Table VII. Showing Distribution of Buildings According to Material of Construction and 
Condition of Repair. 


Good Fair Bad No Information 


Material 

No. 

Percent 

No. 

Percent 

No. 

Percent 

No. 

Percent 

Frame 

973 

35.15 

972 

35.05 

432 

15.48 

397 

14.32 

Brick 

77 

42.35 

40 

21.98 

33 

18.12 

32 

17.55 

Stone 

8 

66.65 

1 

8.34 

1 

8.34 

2 

16.67 

Stucco and Cement 

10 

76.93 

1 

7.69 

1 

7.69 

1 

7.69 

Tar Paper 

4 

11.84 

7 

20.38 

21 

61.84 

2 

5.94 

No Information 

12 

19.05 

15 

23.84 

5 

7.86 

31 

49.25 

Total 

1,084 

35.22 

1,036 

33.64 

493 

16.03 

465 

15.11 


If we eliminate the buildings concerning 
which the information was not sufficiently ac¬ 
curate for use, we find that the frame build¬ 
ings were in good repair only in 45.4 per cent 


as compared with 51.33 per cent in the case 
of the brick buildings. The buildings of 
stucco and stone were not sufficient in num¬ 
ber to bear comparison. 


Owners hip Bf no.of 

gjaiWinos 


Condition of Repair 


Tenant.5 za38 [ 

Ocumr£> i, 146 [ 

Vacancies sse [ 
Total_ 3.942 [ 


53 . 65 % 

b9.37% 


6212 Yc 


8\.Sk% 





\Ta\r 




Condition of Repair of Buildings According to Ownership. 
19 



















Perhaps the worst condition was found in 
the tar paper buildings which are sort of em¬ 
bryonic homes indicating in many instances a 
keen desire for home ownership without the 
necessary financial resources required for the 
construction of a house. It is difficult to esti¬ 
mate how much of this desire for home own¬ 
ership is genuine and how much is due to the 
kind of shiftlessness that leads families to set¬ 
tle in the most unattractive areas, such as the 
“Flats,” with a view to avoiding payment of 
rent and remain content with the lowest possible 
standard of housing. We are led to the be¬ 
lief that both types of families resort to this 
type of construction and in some instances 
real estate speculators have been quick to 
seize upon this desire for home ownership and 
have disposed of properties which they have 
allowed to be built up with tar construction, 
thereby creating a home owning class of slum 
residents whose health is exposed to greater 
menace from the sanitary and moral point of 
view than in some of the worse tenement 


areas. One of the worst districts of this type 
recently developed is in what is called the Riv¬ 
erside District. 

Those who had the opportunity to observe 
conditions while the investigation was in prog¬ 
ress and the field agents engaged in the hous¬ 
ing survey were frequently struck by the con¬ 
dition of neglect found in many buildings 
where broken doors, dangerous stairs, tum¬ 
bledown porches, missing cellar doors, broken 
walls through which the outer air could pen¬ 
etrate, broken and leaking roofs were among 
the conditions noted. A mere tabulation of 
such conditions would be a very feeble way 
of expressing evils that even the photograph 
could not fully portray. For a more detailed 
analysis of the conditions of repair we could 
do no better than to refer the reader to a few 
of the scores of photographs that were taken 
in the course of this inquiry. 

That certain sections of the City were 
worse than others is shown by the following 
table: 


Table VIII. Showing the Distribution of the Condition of Repair of Buildings According 
to Districts Studied. 


Good Fair Bad No Information 


District 

No. 

Percent 

No. 

Percent 

No. 

Percent 

•No. 

Percent 

I 

53 

31.33 

46 

27.29 

47 

27.78 . 

23 

13.6 

II 

143 

40.34 

108 

30.47 

55 

15.54 

48 

.13.65 

III 

6 

16.67 

3 

8.34 

3 

8.34 

24 

66.65 

IV 

34 

28.57 

41 

34.45 

22 

18.49 

22 

18.49 

VIII 

64 

28.38 

74 

32.71 

27 

11.94 

61 

26.97 

IX 

83 

41.35 

58 

28.82 

50 

24.85 

10 

4.98 

X 

190 

38.77 

148 

30.2 

70 

14.29 

82 

16.74 

XI 

17 

21.26 

25 

31.22 

38 

47.52 



XII 

135 

32.5 

155 

37.3 

67 

16.18 

58 

14.02 

XIV 

122 

39.29 

117 

37.56 

20 

6.44 

52 

16.71 

XV 

66 

32.04 

88 

42.69 

31 

15.05 

21 

10.22 

XVI 

54 

72.96 

9 

12.16 

6 

8.12 

5 

6.76 

XVII 

102 

33.66 

118 

38.95 

46 

15.18 

37 

12.21 

XVIII 

15 

15.93 

46 

48.86 

11 

11.76 

22 

23.45 

Total 

1,084 

35.22 

1,036 

33.64 

493 

16.03 

465 

15.11 


Table VIII is more interesting for the evi¬ 
dence it fails to give than for any consistency 
or resemblance of relationship between the 
figures. The very best conditions found in 
the ninth district seem to exist parallel with 
some of the worst conditions. The only de¬ 
duction that can be made from these figures 
are that conditions of bad repair in large pro¬ 


portion are tolerated where both tenants and 
owners of many houses are making an effort 
to maintain a high standard of repairs. Fre¬ 
quently officials are called upon to compel nec¬ 
essary repairs but always the plea of poverty 
on the part either of tenants who fear an in¬ 
crease in rental or of owners who prefer to al¬ 
low their buildings to fall into disrepair, deters 


20 


action. The plea of poverty while justifiable 
in the case of the individual owner, is from 
the point of view of the community an injus¬ 
tice to the owners who keep their properties 
in good repair since real estate values are de¬ 
pendent as much upon neighborhood condi¬ 
tions, as upon the actual conditions of prop¬ 
erties valued. Investigation carried on in the 
City of Philadelphia, however, showed that 
even where the authorities have compelled ex¬ 
treme repairs and improvements of houses the 
cost of these improvements had no material 
efifect upon rental rates. A neighborhood 

CONDITION OF REPAIR IN 

While the condition of repair on the out¬ 
side of the apartment depends to a consider¬ 
able extent upon the general standard of the 
neighborhood, the condition of repair on the 
inside of the individual apartments is largely 
a matter of housekeeping standards on the 
part of the occupant and the supply of homes 


that is deteriorating as a whole is bound to 
reach a point within a short time where it 
must be removed, but mixed neighborhoods 
are a menace because of the good conditions 
that prevail in a limited area which are a pro¬ 
tection to the worse conditions. That such 
is the case in St. Paul is evident to every one 
familiar with the poorer sections of the City. 
The injustice that this condition works upon 
the decent properties needs no emphasis al- 
tho it emanates from a certain commendable, 
if not enlightened sense of charity on the part 
of the legal and administrative authorities. 

APARTMENTS AND VACANCIES. 

in the district in which the people have been 
living. That the local supply in the sense of 
neighborhood supply of houses is an impor¬ 
tant factor is well known among social work¬ 
ers who are constantly encountering difficul¬ 
ties in the way of removing families both be¬ 
cause of the cost of moving long distances and 



Rear room of butcher shop. Bad condition of repair. 


because of the family and friendly connec¬ 
tions which are established in the course of 
years and which constitute a very significant 
factor in the lives of the poor and even of the 
financially more comfortable classes. The ex¬ 
pression “We have lived in the neighborhood 


for twenty or thirty years” is not uncommon 
even among immigrant families. 

That in some instances the problem of pay¬ 
ing arrearages in rent, or the leniency of the 
landlord towards the tenant in so far as the 
prompt payment of rentals is concerned fre- 


21 



















quently interferes with removals to better 
quarters was amply shown by the statements 
made by the tenants in the course of our house 
to house inquiries. This was particularly true 
when the photographs were taken in homes 
which revealed bad conditions. The tenants 
were sometimes so much under the influence 
of the owners as to ask that the fact of their 
permitting the photograph to be taken be kept 
from the owners. 

A classification of the apartments accord¬ 
ing to ownership vacancies and condition of 
repair shows the following distribution: 

Table IX. Showing the Distribution of 
Apartments according to Ownership of Build¬ 
ingCondition of Repair and Vacancies. 

Condition of Repair 


Ownership Good 


Fair 


Bad 

Total 

Tenants 1,313 

53.85 

716 

29.37 

409 

16.78 

2,438 

Owners 795 

69.37 

249 

21.72 

102 

8.91 

1,146 

Vacancies .292 

81.56 

21 

5.81 

45 

12.63 

358 

Total 2.400 

62.12 

986 

25.02 

556 

12.86 

3,942 


Information concerning condition of repair 
in the interior of the apartments was gathered 
in 3942 apartments and in the distribution of 
conditions is shown in the above table. It is 
evident that the condition of repair in the 
rented apartments was worse than in the 
apartments that were occupied by the owners 
as there were twice as many apartments in 
bad condition of repair among the rented as 
compared with the owned apartments. 

Perhaps the most telling fact revealed by 
this table is the high proportion (81.56 per 
cent.) of unrented apartments in good repair 
as compared with either the rented apart¬ 
ments (53.85 per cent.) or the apartments oc¬ 
cupied by the owners (69.37 per cent.). The 
largest proportion of apartments in bad re¬ 
pair was found, as is to be expected, among 
the rented apartments. 

It would seem, therefore, that the occu¬ 
pancy of apartments in bad repair is not due 
to a shortage of accommodations in good re¬ 
pair, but to other causes which we have not 
been able clearly to explain to our own satis¬ 
faction. It is, of course, true that in some in¬ 
stances the very fact that the apartment was 
empty gave the owner an opportunity to make 
the necessary repairs, or, if not, the only other 


possible explanation of this condition might be 
found in the fact that he made the necessary re¬ 
pairs in order to obtain a tenant, or else that 
the houses in better repair were higher in rental 
than those that were in bad condition of re¬ 
pair. In order to verify the latter contention 
sixty apartments in bad condition of repair 
were studied in relation to rent. Of these, 30 
were occupied by tenants and 30 were unoc¬ 
cupied. In the case of the unoccupied houses 
we were compelled to interview the agents or 
owners. It was found that the average rent 
per room in the cases of the unoccupied apart¬ 
ments was $2.07 per month as compared with 
an average rent per month per room for rented 



Yard conditions. Stables close to house. 


occupied apartment of $1.98. This differ¬ 
ence is so slight as to have no particular influ¬ 
ence upon the choice of homes on the part of 
the tenants. It cannot be doubted that other 
causes such as arrearages in payments of rent, 
especially desirable sizes of apartments and 
favorable location from the point of view of 
place of employment, proximity to places of 
amusement and racial or national gregarious¬ 
ness have a tendency to keep families in the 
same home despite conditions which they nei¬ 
ther desire nor create themselves. That in some 
cases poor families living in the poorer dis¬ 
tricts of our cities are responsible for the neg¬ 
lect of their home surroundings, and abuse 
property in a manner that is nothing short of 
criminal must be admitted. It is clear to any 
one investigating conditions first hand, how¬ 
ever, that these cases are rare and are 


22 





usually referred to by owners as indicative 
of conditions which they have to contend with 
as if they were the general rule, instead of be¬ 
ing the exception. Potatoes in the bath tub 
and goats in the parlor have been reported in 
other cities as indicative of the tenant prob¬ 
lem which the owner has to deal with. I have 


found that the tub used for potatoes could un¬ 
der no circumstances be used for bathing as 
there was no means of securing hot water and 
no way of heating the bathroom; while the 
classic story of the goat in the parlor turned 
out to be a case of cruelty to animals when 
the condition of the parlor was considered. 


No. families 

No. 2) Mgs. 

T’erceiri'a 

1 | 1904 

33.8S 

IMil 

rm 


z 

736 

36.94. 

IllllllllllWrl 

nn 

mu n imiiiiiK^iiin—aaa— 

3 

HO 

33.64 

111 i 111111114^?H 11 

ED 

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIBIIIIIIIIIIliEill 

4 

105- 

50 .46 

min 

ES 

mui mi iiiiiiraiiiiiiiHi 

5 

21 

38.08 

iiiii^iniiii 

Hill 1 IIIIIUI II1 llllllllllllli?!?i^lll 

6 

22 

... . 

lllllllllllHIBIIIIIIIIIIIliEaH 

7 

9 

33.34 

IIIIIII^IIHIIII 

.lIMIllllMBggMM 

8 

Z 

60.0 

linn 

IE 

iimiiiE9oiiiiiiiiiiiiimin 

9 

4 

60.0 

ininiiii 

■ 

lllllllllllllllllllll'go: 

Fo Inf. 

63 

38.08 

ii urn iiiiiui 

11 

irnnESH 

Total 

3078 

3S.ZZ 

IHlIflllll^ 

IIIIIIIIIIIIBIIIIIIIIMM 


J Gjood 


€><ad 


I .No Infornnadion 


Condition of Repair of Buildings According to Number of Families. 

















































VACANCIES. 


It has been shown that the vacant apart¬ 
ments were in good condition of repair in 
larger proportion than either the apartments 
occupied by tenants or owners. This would 
seem to indicate that vacancies do not depend 
upon the condition of repair but upon some 


other causes which we have endeavored to 
suggest, but there is no kind of evidence that 
could be gathered in a form which would 
measure the effects of any of the factors sug¬ 
gested. 



Condition of Bedroom. House partly occupied. 


Out of a total of 4482 apartments exam¬ 
ined 2703 or 60.31 per cent, were occupied by 
tenants, 1254 or 27.97 per cent were occupied 
by owners and 525 or 11.62 per cent, were va¬ 
cant. This large proportion of vacant apart¬ 
ments, more than four-fifths of which were 
in the best condition of repair, represents prac¬ 
tically the profit that is ordinarily expected 
from properties, at least en gros, and from 
the point of view of the community repre¬ 


sents the double loss of good accommodations 
remaining unoccupied and the unprofitable 
vacancies which should be yielding a revenue 
to the community. 

To what extent the proportion of such 
properties can be reduced through careful so¬ 
cial service connected with the ownership of 
properties will be pointed out in the latter part 
of this report in which we shall deal with rem¬ 
edies. 


24 





Toilets and Baths 


TOILET FACILITIES, 


It seems strange that at the present day 
those interested in housing reform should still 
find themselves in the “toilet period” of hous¬ 
ing reform. I call this the “toilet period” be¬ 
cause in the course of our inquiry we were 
still compelled to devote a considerable por¬ 
tion of our time to the examination of toilet 
conditions that should make any community 
blush with shame for tolerating. The photo¬ 
graphs which are more forceful in interpret¬ 
ing to the public the conditions that actually 
exist and which make all statement regarding 
the conditions practically unnecessary, are es¬ 
pecially called to the attention of the reader. 

The reason for the existence of such condi 
tions while in many instances attributable to 
the tenants, is nevertheless the full responsi¬ 
bility of the Health Department which may 
not be able to cope with the situation both be¬ 
cause of limitations in the inspection force 
and a lack of efficiency, and because the courts 
are frequently unwilling or unable to realize 
the importance of using their judicial power 
in the protection of the health of the people 
with the same sense of justice that guides 
them in the protection of mere property. 

It may not be fair to assume that the Judges 
of St. Paul are not able to see clearly their 
duty in relation to health problems with the 
same degree of judicial fairness to the injured 
parties that they apply to other problems of 
human relationships, but if they do see their 
duty clearly and have been ready to act, but 
the Health Department or any other Depart¬ 
ment of the City government has failed to 
bring the matter to their attention, those re¬ 
sponsible for such neglect should bear the re¬ 
ward of public condemnation, and of judicial 
or administrative action in removing them 
from office. Property can be reproduced, 
health cannot; and judicial action in this case 
should precede rather than follow the act of 
offending against the health of the people. 


Let us see for a moment what the condi¬ 
tions found in the toilets were, and what fac¬ 
tors have contributed toward the creation of 
these conditions. Table X shows the loca¬ 
tion of toilets, which is the first element in de¬ 
termining the cleanliness and lighting. 

Table X. Showing Distribution of Toilets 
According to Location. 


Location 

Number 

Percentage 

Yard 

1,220 

30.37 

Bath 

1,662 

41.38 

Hall 

249 

6.20 

Basement 

188 

4.67 

Apartments 

546 

13.58 

No. Inf. 

153 

3.80 

Total 

4,018 

100.00 


The above figures when considered as re¬ 
lating to some of the poorer sections of St. 
Paul are sufficient to explain, at least in part, 
the reason for the serious conditions which 
were found. Out of a total of 4018 toilets 



Outhouse in shed on 14th St. 


25 





41.24 per cent, were located outside of the 
apartments, either in the yards or in the halls 
and basements. Of all objectionable places 
for toilet facilities the location in the base¬ 
ment is the most objectionable, altho the loca¬ 
tion in dark halls as was so frequently the 
case, is by no means greatly more to be de¬ 
sired. 



Attention should 
especially be called to 
the 546 toilets locat¬ 
ed in the apartments 
but not connected 
with a bath. In many 
instances these toilets 
were in very insani¬ 
tary condition and 
interfered with the 
privacy of the mem¬ 
bers of the family, 
and made privacy, 
where there were 
lodgers, practically 
impossible. 

A further analysis 

of our data relative Toilet and water in basement 
.1 i • * • r used by six families. 

to the conditions or 

toilets and their location gives the following 
distribution: 


Table XI. Showing Distribution of Toilets 
According to Location and Condition of Clean¬ 
liness. 


Condition No 


Location 

No. 

Clean 

Dirty 

Filthy Nuisance 

Inf. 

Yard 

1,220 

623 

411 

85 

68 

33 

Bath 

1,662 

1,346 

246 

17 

34 

19 

Kitchen 

377 

237 

110 

8 

11 

11 

Hall 

249 

150 

78 

7 

6 

8 

Basement 

188 

90 

72 

11 

10 

5 

Bedroom 

88 

71 

16 

1 



Dining room 

33 

24 

7 

2 

0 

0 

Closet 

16 

14 




2 

Storeroom 

14 

6 

4 

3 

1 


Attic 

9 

6 

2 

1 



Parlor 

5 

4 

1 




Living room 

4 

4 





No Inf. 

153 

70 

41 

12 

10 

20 

Total 

4,018 

2,645 

988 

147 

140 

98 


Table XIa. Showing Percentage of Dis¬ 
tribution of Toilets According to Location and 
Condition of Cleanliness. 

Condition of Toilets No 


Location 

Clean 

Dirty 

Filthy 

Nuisance 

Inf. 

Yard 

51.13 

33.67 

6.95 

5.55 

2.70 

Bath 

80.99 

14.81 

1.02 

2.04 

1.14 

Kitchen 

62.84 

29.20 

2.12 

2.92 

2.92 

Hall 

60.22 

31.35 

2.81 

2.41 

3.21 

Basement 

47.85 

38.32 

5.85 

5.32 

2.66 

Bedroom 

80.68 

18.18 

1.14 



Dining room 

72.73 

21.21 

6.06 



Closet 

87.50 




12.50 

Storeroom 

42.86 

28.59 

21.41 

7.14 


Attic 

66.65 

22.24 

11.11 



Parlor 

80.00 

20.00 




Living room 

100.00 





No Inf. 

45.73 

26.81 

7.84 

6.54 

13.08 

Total 

65.80 

24.61 

3.66 

3.49 

2.44 


The above table shows a greater variety of 
location of toilets than Table X and reveals 
haphazard placement that is bound to prove 
undesirable in many cases. We find, for ex¬ 
ample, that bedrooms, closets, dining rooms, 
parlors and living rooms are selected for the 
location of toilets instead of separating them 
in some way from the living quarters in order 
to afford ventilation and privacy. 

The fact that out of a total of 1220 toilets 
located in the yard only 623, or 51.06 per cent, 
were clean and the rest were, dirty in 33.7 
per cent, of the cases, filthy in 6.97 per cent, 
of the cases and a nuisance in 5.57 per cent, 
of the cases, shows how dangerous it is to 
place toilets outside of the apartment. If we 
consider, on the other hand, the toilets located 
in the apartments we find that there is a dis¬ 
tinct difference in the condition of cleanliness 
which is favorable to the bath room toilet. 
Out of a total of 1662 toilets located in bath¬ 
rooms 80.98 per cent, were clean and 14.18 
per cent, were dirty. In only 1.03 per cent, 
were the conditions designated as filthy and in 
2.04 per cent, as a nuisance. This distribution 
of conditions of bath rooms also tends to show 
that in the vast majority of cases bathrooms 
are not misused. 

The fact that out of a total of 4018 toilets 
examined, 147 were filthy and 140 constituted 
a nuisance from the point of view of cleanli¬ 
ness alone, shows that there is considerable 
neglect on the part of the authorities in the 
inspection of toilets. That the tenants are 


26 


some times responsible for the conditions that 
exist is not to be questioned, but this should be 
no justification for tolerating such conditions. 

The cleanliness of toilets while primarily a 
matter of housekeeping is also dependent up¬ 
on the possibility for placing responsibility up¬ 
on those using them. Toilets located outside 


of the apartments cannot be supervised and 
as will be shown later where there is a sharing 
of toilets with a number of families or even 
with one, cleanliness is not practicable, whether 
that be among foreigners who are unaccus¬ 
tomed to modern plumbing or among Ameri¬ 
cans experienced in the uses of such plumbing. 


VENTILATION OF TOILETS. 


In the course of our various inspection of 
toilet conditions, one of the most serious evils 
was the complete disregard of the need for 
ventilation. This was especially surprising 
where every opportunity for providing ade¬ 
quate ventilation existed, but the owners or 
builders had deliberately, or through igno¬ 
rance, neglected to make the necessary provi¬ 
sions. 



Sink and toilet used by six families. 


The figures relating to the distribution of 
toilets according to provisions for ventilation 
are contained in the following table: 


Table XII. Showing distribution of toilets 
according to location and provisions for venti¬ 


lation: 

Ventilation No 


Location 

No. 

Adq. 

Poor 

None 

Inf. 

Bath 

1,662 

1,355 

158 

32 

117 

Kitchen 

377 

207 

61 

80 

29 

Hall 

249 

66 

35 

81 

67 

Basement 

188 

48 

59 

37 

44 

Bed room 

88 

47 

12 

16 

13 

Dining room 33 

11 

7 

14 

1 

Closet 

16 

8 



8 

Storeroom 

14 

4 

2 

5 

3 

Attic 

9 

4 

5 



Parlor 

5 

1 

3 

1 


Living room 

4 

3 



1 

No inf. 

153 

55 

24 

26 

48 

Total 

2,798 

1,809 

366 

292 

331 


Table XIla. Showing percentage distri¬ 
bution of toilets according to location and pro¬ 
visions for ventilation: 

Ventilation of Toilets 


Location 

Adq. 

Bath 

81.51 

Kitchen 

54.89 

Hall 

26.45 

Basement 

25.55 

Bed room 

53.38 

Dining room 

33.32 

Closet 

50.00 

Storeroom 

28.58 

Attic 

44.45 

Parlor 

20.00 

Living room 

75.00 

No inf. 

35.95 

Total 

64.65 


The above figures 
for ventilation existe 


Poor None No in 

9.51 1.93 7.05 

16.29 21.23 7.59 

14.15 32.48 26.92 

31.39 19.68 23.38 

13.64 18.19 14.79 

21.23 42.43 3.02 

50.00 

14.25 35.75 21.42 

.55.55 

60.00 20.00 

25.00 

15.68 16.99 31.38 

13.09 10.42 11.84 

show that no provision 
in 292 toilets or 10.42 


per cent, of the total examined. This does not 
take into account the yard toilets which with 
practically no exception had inadequate venti- 


27 




lation, unless the doors were out of order as 
was frequently the case. The latter condition 
made privacy impossible. Some of our photo¬ 


graphs show the character of some of the 
yard toilets which had the doors out of order 
or missing. 



Basement containing chickens, fish, pigeons, spring and toilet. 


It is interesting to note that the toilets lo¬ 
cated in the bathroom were adequately venti¬ 
lated in more than four-fifths of the cases 
(81.51 per cent), while those located in halls, 
storerooms, dining rooms, parlors, were well 
ventilated in less than one-third of the cases. 
The fact that 21.23 per cent, of the toilets lo¬ 
cated in kitchens had no facilities for ven¬ 
tilation whatever, shows the situation quite 
clearly. The toilets located in the halls reveal 
a still more serious situation, as out of 249 as 
many as 81 or 21.23 per cent, were without 
any means of ventilation and 61 or 16.29 per 


cent, were poorly ventilated. 

It is clear to any one familiar with local con¬ 
ditions that an effort on the part of the Health 
Department, or some other department in 
which the control of housing sanitation might 
be placed, could improve the conditions of 
ventilation in from 50 per cent, to 75 per cent, 
of the toilets which are now either without 
ventilation or poorly provided with means of 
ventilation without compelling costly altera¬ 
tions or serious structural changes in build¬ 
ings. 


REPAIR OF TOILETS. 


The character of repair of toilets is often 
responsible for the condition of uncleanliness. 
It can hardly be expected that a toilet that 
does not flush properly or has no flushing fa¬ 
cilities would be kept clean, nor are broken 


seats and dangerous floors conducive to care¬ 
ful use of such toilets. 

A tabulation of the figures relating to con¬ 
dition of repair gives some very interesting 
results: 


28 




Table XIII. Showing number of toilets 
according to location and condition of repair: 


Repair No 


Location 

No. 

Good 

Fair 

Bad 

Inf. 

Yard 

1,220 

233 

465 

470 

52 

Bath 

1,662 

1,317 

187 

119 

39 

Kitchen 

377 

249 

75 

48 

5 

Hall 

249 

146 

37 

43 

23 

Basement 

188 

92 

34 

50 

12 

Bed room 

88 

65 

10 

11 

2 

Dining room 

33 

18 

7 

8 


Closet 

16 

10 


2 

4 

Storeroom 

14 

8 


6 


Attic 

9 

3 

6 



Parlor 

5 

2 

2 

1 


Living room 

4 

4 




No. Inf. 

153 

71 

27 

27 

28 

Total 

4,018 

2,218 

850 

785 

165 


Table XII la. Shozving percentage of 
number of toilets according to location and 
condition of repair: 




Repair of Toilet 


No 

Location 

Good 

Fair 

Bad 

Inf. 

Yard 

19.11 

38.13 

38.51 

4.25 

Bath 

79.24 

11.26 

7.16 

2.34 

Kitchen 

66.06 

19.89 

12.73 

1.32 

Hall 

58.63 

14.86 

17.27 

9.24 

Basement 

48.95 

18.09 

26.59 

6.37 

Bed room 

73.87 

11.36 

12.50 

2.27 

Dining room 

54.54 

21.21 

24.25 


Closet 

62.50 


12.50 

25.00 

Store room 

57.14 


42.86 


Attic 

33.35 

66.65 



Parlor 

40.00 

40.00 

20.00 


Living room 

100.00 




No Inf. 

46.40 

17.65 

17.65 

18.30 

Total 

55.18 

21.16 

19.55 

4.11 



Toilets on Phalen Creek. 


The above figures show that almost one- 
half of the toilets were either only in fair re¬ 
pair or were entirely out of repair. It is quite 
interesting to note that toilets located within 
apartments are most frequently in good re¬ 
pair and that those located in the bath rooms 
show a proportion of 79.24 per cent, in good 
repair as against 48.95 per cent, in good re¬ 
pair of those located in the basements. Elim¬ 
inating the few toilets located in the store 
rooms, almost one half of which, 42.86 per 


cent., were in bad repair, the yard toilets 
showed the greatest frequency of bad repair, 
with the basement toilets next in order. 

Many of these defects were trifling, while 
others were very serious and were a menace 
to both health and safety. That much of the 
worst kind of disrepair was due to neglect on 
the part of the owners to prevent further de¬ 
terioration by a small expenditure at the be¬ 
ginning, was evident from many of the con¬ 
ditions found. 


29 



LIGHTING OF TOILETS. 


Closely associated with condition of repair 
and cleanliness, but especially cleanliness, is 
lighting. In our tabulation little attention has 
been paid to the lighting of yard toilets which 
are almost invariably constructed on the old 
model with the moon shaped aperture or 
small window which does not open. A tab¬ 
ulation of the lighting condition of the toilets 
located within the building shows the follow¬ 
ing: 

Table XIV. Showing distribution of toi¬ 
lets according to location by condition of light- 


mg: 



Light 


No 

Location 

No. 

Light 

Gloomy 

Dark 

Inf. 

Bath 

1,662 

1,290 

179 

73 

120 

Kitchen 

377 

188 

77 

84 

28 

Hall 

249 

53 

29 

121 

46 

Basement 

188 

29 

56 

59 

44 

Bed room 

88 

38 

13 

25 

12 

Dining room 

33 

8 

12 

12 

1 

Closet 

16 

4 

3 


9 

Store room 

14 

4 

2 

5 

3 

Attic 

9 

4 

5 



Parlor 

5 

2 


3 


Living room 

4 

3 



1 

No Inf. 

153 

60 

20 

29 

44 

Total 

2,798 

1,680 

396 

411 

308 


Table XIVa. Shoiving percentage of distri¬ 
bution of toilets according to location by condi¬ 
tion of lighting: 



Lighting of Toilets 


No 

Location 

Light 

Gloomy 

Dark 

Inf. 

Bath 

77.63 

10.76 

4.39 

7.22 

Kitchen 

49.88 

20.41 

22.29 

7.42 

Hall 

21.29 

11.65 

48.58 

18.48 

Basement 

15.42 

29.79 

31.39 

23.40 

Bed room 

43.17 

14.78 

28.41 

13.64 

Dining room 

24.25 

36.36 

36.36 

3.03 

Closet 

25.00 

18.75 


56.25 

Store room 

28.59 

14.29 

35.71 

21.41 

Attic 

44.44 

55.56 



Parlor 

40.00 

60.00 



Living room 

75.00 



25.00 

No Inf. 

39.24 

13.08 

18.91 

28.77 

Total 

60.14 

14.16 

14.68 

11.02 


Only 60 per cent, of the 2798 toilets located 
within the buildings were lighted satisfacto¬ 
rily and 396, or 14.16 per cent, were gloomy, 
while 411, or 14.68 per cent, were dark. In 
other words, there was a greater proportion 
of dark toilets than there was of the type 
that were gloomy. 


The toilets located in the bath rooms were 
more frequently provided with adequate 
lighting facilities than the toilets located in 
any other part of the building. The basement 
and hall toilets were as objectionable from the 



Partitioned toilet in kitchen. Open at top. No other 
ventilation. 

point of view of lighting as from the 
point of cleanliness, repair and ventilation. 

Throughout our entire investigation, the 
basement and hall toilets were a serious men¬ 
ace to the safety and health of the tenants. 



Basement Toilet. 


30 





NUMBER OF FAMILIES USING TOILETS. 

We have referred in the early part of this chapter to the dangers of divided responsibil¬ 
ity in the use of toilets. The following table shows to what extent this division of respon¬ 
sibility exists. 


Table XV. Showing number of toilets according to number of families using them 

and their location: 


No. Families 


Location—Yard 



No Inf. 

Hall 

Apts. 

Total 

Using 


No. of 

Compartments 







1 

2 

3 

4 

6 





1 

697 

25 

1 

1 


36 

73 

2,407 

3,240 

2 

138 

85 

1 

2 

1 

4 

36 

161 

428 

3 

20 

20 

5 


1 

1 

18 

7 

72 

4 

4 

11 

4 

3 



12 

3 

37 

5 


8 



2 



2 

12 

6 



1 




4 


5 

7 








2 

2 

8 

1 


o 

2 

1 


1 


7 

9 







2 


2 

Public 

5 

1 




1 



7 

No Inf. 

44 

7 




58 

1 

7 

117 

Total 

909 

157 

14 

8 

5 

100 

147 

2,589 

3,929 



The sharing of 
toilets in yards is 
a very common 
practice, and it is 
not surprising that 
out of a total of 
909 toilets with one 
compartment, 697 
or 76.67 per cent 
are used by one 
family only, and 
168 yard toilets 
are used by two or 
more families. 

The most sur¬ 
prising fact re- 
vealed by the 
above table, however, is to be found in the 
sharing of toilets by more than one family 


Shed Outhouse. 


when that toilet is located in a private apart¬ 


ment. Out of a total of 2589 toilets located 


in apartments, 175 were being used by at least 
one additional family besides the one in whose 
apartment it was located. While this is not 
an exorbitant proportion, it involves 379 fam¬ 
ilies or about one-ninth of the total number of 
families studied in the course of this inquiry. 

A still better conception of the extent of 
toilet sharing can be obtained from the study 
of table XVI. 


Table XVI. Shoiving the distribution of 
average number of toilets per family accord¬ 
ing to general location by districts: 


District 

1 

2 

3 

4 

8 

9 

10 

Yard 

1.33 

1.1 

1.22 

1.19 

1.13 

1.24 

1.36 

Hall 

1.6 

4.12 


2.63 

1 . 

2.71 

1.12 

Apts. 

1 . 

1.03 

1 . 

1.11 

1.17 

1.09 

1.08 

Total 

1.19 

1.1 

1.2 

1.34 

1.15 

1.25 

1.12 


District 

11 

12 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

Total 

Yard 

1 . 

1.09 

1.33 

1.08 

1.36 

1.15 

1.15 

1.19 

Hall 

1 . 

2.58 

1 . 

1.16 

2.33 

1 . 


2.19 

Apts. 

1 . 

1.07 

1.05 

1.06 

1.12 

1.1 


1.07 

Total 

1 . 

1.15 

1.14 

1.07 

1.19 

1.13 

1.15 

1.15 


This table shows that the largest average 
number of families per toilet is to be found 
in the buildings where the toilets are located 
in the halls. If we remember that these were 
also the toilets with the poorest lighting facil¬ 
ities and the most inadequate means of ven¬ 
tilation, the seriousness of the objection to 
hall toilets is apparent. That in many 
cases the stench from these hall toilets, espe¬ 
cially when out of repair, permeated the at¬ 
mosphere of the entire building was often 
evident, and the complaints of the tenants re¬ 
garding this evil were quite numerous. 


31 







SPECIFIC CONDITION OF TOILETS. 


EDST 


YARD 

BATH 

ICITCHEK 

HALL 

BABEMENT 






I 1.14-B 

ms%L 


E33ZEM. 

iMStZ 



usadi. 


DEC-ROOM paa 

t—~ i 

I '?Zl3% ; 


DINIIRVROOM 

GLOSE.T 

<5T0RJ1* ROOM 

Attic 

pastor 

nvinq-Hoon 

NO-IMTOKHATiOK 

TOTAL 
EH3 Clean 


Eft#*! 






I n.n - tea 


poo^g- 


R37§r 




tHabance B*No Inp 


Distribution of Toilets According to Condition of 
Cleanliness and Location. 


The statistical discussion of the condition 
of toilets can be concluded in no way more 
forcefully than by repeating in their original 
form some of the notes taken at random from 
the cards used by the field workers in the 
course of their investigation. These notes 
were not originally intended for publication 
but merely for the guidance of the photog¬ 
rapher. 

“Odor from toilets very bad. They are set 
on ground with only small hole.” 

“Place is filthy. Hamburger machine and 
filthy toilet about 10 feet apart.” 

“Plumbing in bath all held together with 
string and rags.” 

“One toilet on this place so overful it was 
boarded up—filthy place.” 

“Four families using one toilet that is situ¬ 
ated off kitchen in one apartment.’ 

“Recommend for photo one toilet compart¬ 
ment under stairs (second floor) used by 
seven apartments on 
second and third 
floors.” 

“Cesspool here has 
not been cleaned for 
over 6 years and 
backs up and comes 
into house. Ten¬ 
ants say the odor is 
awful in hot weather. 
The people lived here 
six years and in all 
that time it has not 
been cleaned. It is 
about 10 feet from 
house. Also house 
next door is connect¬ 
ed with same cess¬ 
pool.” 

“Toilet in cellar used by shop and two fam¬ 
ilies. Toilet dark and damp,—very bad 
shape. Storeroom for butcher shop in con¬ 
nection with the toilet. Place very dirty and 
insanitary.” 

“Toilet 20 feet from house and a lake be¬ 
tween it and house. Toilet under water.” 



Basement Toilet, Sibley St. 


32 




























































BATHS 


“Toilet partly under water at rear of 
stable.” 

“Toilet is a hole dug in sand in mushroom 
cave vicinity. Three families use this.” 

“Toilet in cave at higher level than cave 
containing spring water.” 

“Vessel used as toilet. Bad odor in rear of 
store.” 

“The families at 19, 23, 25, 27, 29, and 31, 
in fact all the houses in the row use toilet in 
basement of 110-Street.” 

“One bathroom partitioned off corner of a 
larger room. No ventilation—no air. Used 
by nine (9) apartments, twenty (20) in¬ 
dividuals.” 

“Toilet in basement. Home-made box for 
tank. Fixture broken,—filled up—mouldy— 
awful, (left hand.)” 

“Outside W. C. vault full and rubbish on 
top.” 

“Pail used as toilet, never emptied.” 

“Remains of old cesspool under home.” 

“Toilet in shed used by the thirteen (13) 
people living here. (Three of whom are un¬ 
der five years). The spring which supplies 
drinking water is in the same shed. Condi¬ 
tion; dirty, dark and no ventilation.” 

“Shed has spring pipe emptying into it with 


toilet on other side. Family also uses same 
spring for drinking water supply.” 

“Outside toilet in very bad condition, noth¬ 
ing but a few boards put together. It is lo¬ 
cated in carriage shed.” 

“No water all winter until June 7th and no 
toilet at all. Are using kitchen in vacant 
house next door as toilet.” 

“Yard toilet is almost falling down, no seat, 
and most of roof gone.” 

“Toilet: only ventilation is through bakery.” 

“The toilet is badly situated and could not 
be ventilated except through the living room.” 

Perhaps these few quotations will suffice to 
indicate the menace that the toilet problem in 
this city represents, leaving to the statistical 
tables to give some conception of the extent of 
the problem; represented by the specific in¬ 
stances given in the above quotations. 

In the course of our investigation we were 
greatly impressed with the large number of 
families that had baths attached to their 
homes. This proportion is greater than any 
that is ordinarily found in the poorer districts 
of eastern cities. The distribution of families 
with and without baths according to districts 
is as follows: 


Table XVII. Showing distribution of families according to bathing facilities by districts and 

number of families using each bath: 




Families Hav¬ 


Families Having Bath 




ing No Bath 





Families Using 



No. 

Total 

1 

2 

3 

4 l 

District 

1 

189 

92 

91 


1 


District 

2 

308 

193 

192 


1 


District 

3 

29 

2 

2 




District 

4 

163 

31 

26 

5 



District 

8 

73 

225 

204 

16 

1 

l : 

District 

9 

94 

190 

153 

31 

4 

1 

District 

10 

287 

440 

385 

53 

2 


District 

11 

84 

3 

3 




District 

12 

311 

319 

280 

30 

5 

4 

District 

14 

265 

119 

116 

3 



District 

15 

140 

80 

74 

6 



District 

16 

51 

55 

36 

17 

1 

1 

District 

17 

232 

88 

81 

5 

1 

1 

District 

18 

104 






Total 


2,330 

1,837 

1,643 

166 

16 

8 : 



Table XVIIa. Showing percentage of distribution of families according to bathing facilities 
by districts and number of families using each bath: 




Families 

Families 




With 

Without 




Bath 

Bath 


District 

1 

67.25 

32.75 

1 

98.91 

District 

2 

61.45 

38.55 

99.95 

District 

3 

93.55 

6.45 

100.00 

District 

4 

84.11 

15.89 

83.88 

District 

8 

24.51 

75.49 

90.67 

District 

9 

33.09 

66.91 

80.52 

District 

10 

39.49 

60.51 

87.50 

District 

11 

96.55 

3.45 

100.00 

District 

12 

49.38 

50.62 

87.76 

District 

14 

69.01 

30.99 

97.48 

District 

15 

63.62 

36.38 

92.50 

District 

16 

48.12 

51.88 

65.48 

District 

17 

72.50 

27.50 

92.05 

District 

18 

100.00 



Total 


55.98 

44.02 

89.46 


Out of a total of 4167 families for which 
information was gathered, 2330, or 55.98 per 
cent, had no bathing facilities in their homes, 



Note outhouse with piece of tin for door. West Side Flats. 

while 1837, or 44.02 per cent, did have bath¬ 
ing facilities, or at least, some accommodation 
which might be used for bathing purposes. 
That many of these baths were in a condition 
of disrepair was found in 194 cases where 
they actually could not be used because of bad 
plumbing. That many had no way of heat¬ 
ing water or heating the bathrooms them¬ 
selves, was found to be the case very often. 


No. 

Families 

Using 

Bath 


2 

3 

4 

6 

7 


1.09 





.05 




16.12 





7.13 

.44 

.44 

.88 

.44 

16.33 

2.11 

.52 

.52 


12.05 

.45 




9.41 

1.57 

1.26 



2.52 





7.50 





30.88 

1.82 

1.82 



5.67 

1.14 

1.14 



9.03 

.87 

.43 

.16 

.05 


One of the most objectionable features of 
some of the bathing facilities is to be found 
in the fact that in 194 cases or 10.54 per cent, 
the bath tubs located in the hall or in the pri¬ 
vate apartment of one family were to be used 
by one or more additional families. The men¬ 
ace to health due to probable contagion and 
the likelihood of misunderstanding between 
families as to use and abuse of such bathing 
facilities would seem to mitigate against fre¬ 
quent or careful use. 

With climatic conditions such as we have in 
the City of St. Paul, which reduce outdoor 
bathing to only six or seven weeks in the year, 
and the failure on the part of the City to pro¬ 
vide public baths, a condition which singles 
out this community as one of the most unpro¬ 
gressive among the larger cities of this coun¬ 
try, we realize what chance for keeping clean 
our working classes, compelled to live in 
homes without bathing facilities, have. 

When we consider the distribution of bath¬ 
ing facilities by districts we find that there 
was not a single bath in the eighteenth district. 
The eleventh, third and fourth districts had 
practically no bathing facilities. 

When the Amherst H. Wilder Baths were 
built it was hoped that the municipality would 


34 



realize from the success of this enterprise that 
baths are needed and that the people are eager 
to use them. So far, however, there has been 


no action taken by the City government that 
even contemplates the construction of public 
baths. 


T, 



Flat building. One toilet and water in basement used by six families. 


35 


















Sewers and Water Supply 


Two essentials of good housing are sewer 
connections and water supply. Generally 
speaking, where there is a water supply there 
is a sewer system on the streets, and where 
there is a sewer connected with the house 
there is also a water supply coming from the 
general system of the municipality. 

When we consider the poorer sections of a 
given community, however, it is found that 
there is no very close relation between the pro¬ 
portion of buildings supplied with water and 
those having sewer connections. 

An examination according to districts of the 
available sewer facilities and water supply 
shows the following distribution according to 
districts. 

Table XVIII. Showing total sezverage and 
city water supply by districts: 

TOTAL HOUSES 




No 

No 

City 

No City 


District 

Sewer 

Sewer 

Inf. 

Water 

Water 

No I 

I 

60 

83 

13 

83 

65 

8 

II 

162 

137 

5 

244 

58 

2 

III 

2 

27 

1 

2 

27 

1 

IV 

43 

54 

5 

55 

42 

5 

VIII 

198 

1 

1 

200 



IX 

169 

4 

17 

175 


15 

X 

438 

63 

18 

495 

8 

16 

XI 

9 

65 

4 

10 

63 

5 

XII 

366 

23 

6 

377 

12 

6 

XIV 

231 

63 

24 

287 

9 

22 

XV 

150 

*33 

14 

176 

9 

12 

XVI 

54 

18 

1 

60 

13 


XVII 

102 

176 

5 

140 

137 

6 

XVIII 


97 



97 


Total 

1984 

844 

114 

2304 

540 

98 


Table XVIIIa. Showing percentage total 
sewerage and city water supply by districts. 


PER CENT HOUSES 




No 

No 

City 

No City 


District 

Sewer 

Sewer 

Inf. 

Water 

Water 

No Inf. 

I 

38.45 

53.23 

8.32 

53.23 

41.65 

5.12 

* 11 

53.27 

45.09 

1.64 

80.25 

19.09 

.66 

III 

6.66 

90.00 

3.34 

6.66 

90.00 

3.34 

IV 

42.13 

52.96 

4.91 

53.92 

41.17 

4.91 

VIII 

99.00 

.05 

.05 

100.00 



IX 

88.99 

2.11 

8.90 

92.21 


7.79 

X 

84.42 

12.12 

3.46 

95.38 

1.54 

3.08 

XI 

11.54 

83.34 

5.12 

12.83 

80.76 

6.41 

XII 

92.69 

5.79 

1.52 

95.44 

3.04 

1.52 

XIV 

72.65 

19.80 

7.55 

90.25 

2.83 

6.92 

XV 

76.19 

16.77 

7.14 

89.46 

4.55 

6.09 

XVI 

73.97 

24.66 

1.37 

82.18 

17.82 


XVII 

36.07 

62.16 

1.77 

49.49 

48.39 

2.12 

XVIII 


100.00 



100.00 


Total 

67.43 

28.69 

3.88 

78.31 

18.36 

3.33 



Artesian well—Upper Levee. 


The above figures show 844 houses or 28.69 
per cent, of the total studied not connected with 
sewers. The situation relative to sewer con¬ 
nections is still worse when we consider spe¬ 
cific districts. We find, for example, that Dis¬ 
trict Eighteen which 
is one of the worst 
that has come under 
our observation, and 
which is located on 
the Upper Levee, is 
without any sewer 
connections what¬ 
ever, while the 
Third District on 
the West Side Levee 
and practically the 
entire Eleventh Dis¬ 
trict generally 
known as Phalen 
Creek, were without 
sewer facilities. The 
situation relative to 
sewer connections is 
also quite serious in 
the Seventeenth 
District, the district 
which consists of 
the West Sev- 
enth Street District to the River. The make¬ 
shifts for drainage, the repulsive condition of 



Sink drains through side of 
house into yard. 


36 














yards and pollution of Phalen Creek, which is 
nothing more than an open sewer, indicate a 
need for a better development of drainage fa¬ 
cilities in some sections, at least, that could with 
difficulty be equaled in cities of the size of St. 
Paul. Some of the photographs reproduced in 
this report show the absence of drainage facil¬ 
ities, and the conditions that attend failure to 
provide proper drainage. CITY WATER is 
one of the essential requirements of health and 
cleanliness. One spring or pump for from 
10 to 20 families, at a distance amounting to 
from about thirty to a thousand or more 
feet from the house, is not conducive to 
high standards of cleanliness, especially during 
the very severe winters that prevail in this cli¬ 
mate. With the City’s failure to provide pub¬ 
lic bathing facilities and the complete absence 
of an adequate and easily accessible water sup¬ 


ply, the condition of filth in homes and the 
frightful neglect of the personal cleanliness of 
tenants are not out of keeping under existing 
circumstances. 

In the case of water as in the case of sewers, 
the Eighteenth District, known as the Upper 
Levee, had no supply of water beyond such sup¬ 
ply as is derived from a spring or a pump. In 
several instances from five to twenty families 
shared in one source of water supply and in the 
Third District, known as the West Side Upper 
Levee, the supply was wholly inadequate for 
the number of families using the existing sup¬ 
ply. 

It may be said that the sewer system and wa¬ 
ter supply are least adequate where they are 
most needed, and that where there is an inade¬ 
quate sewer system there is also a poor supply 
of water. 



Dark area on stove pipe shows high water mark during flood. 
Note dark rooms in rear. 


37 




Garbage, Ashes and Rubbish 


The unsightly appearance of 
many of the streets and yards 
in the poorer sections of this City 
is frequently due to the failure 
on the part of the owners or 
tenants to provide and utilize 
receptacles for the storage of 
garbage and ashes. That the 
City authorities share in the 
responsibility for the failure to 
provide and use receptacles is 
clear, since the City ordinances 
provide that such receptacles 
should be available in connec¬ 
tion with every building in the 
City of St. Paul. 



Rear of Cody Block. Garbage and waste infested with rats. 


An examination of the adequacy of the fa¬ 
cilities for storing garbage showed the follow¬ 
ing distribution of buildings according to 
availability or absence of garbage cans. 

Table XIX. Showing distribution of 
buildings according to presence or absence of 
garbage cans. 

Receptacles 



Available 

No Receptacles 

District 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

I 

42 

29.38 

101 

70.62 

II 

144 

48.32 

154 

51.68 

III 

2 

7.14 

26 

92.86 

IV 

34 

36.15 

60 

63.85 

VIII 

145 

71.45 

59 

28.45 

IX 

118 

66.65 

59 

33.35 

X 

332 

68.22 

152 

31.78 

XI 

11 

18.04 

50 

81.96 

XII 

260 

72.82 

97 

27.18 

XIV 

163 

57.42 

121 

42.58 

XV 

118 

65.56 

62 

34.44 

XVI 

37 

59.68 

25 

40.32 

XVII 

103 

37.85 

169 

62.15 

XVIII 



86 

100.00 

Total 

1,509 

55.23 

1,221 

44.77 


The above Table shows that out of a total 
of 2,882 buildings only 1,509, or 55.23 per cent, 
had receptacles for the storage of garbage. 
With such inadequate provisions it is to be ex¬ 
pected that the families would dispose of 
such garbage either by burning it, which is 


more desirable than any other method of dis¬ 
posal, or by throwing it into the alley, street, or 
yard as the case may be. 

The feeding of garbage to animals, partic¬ 
ularly chickens, is not uncommon and in some 
instances saves the surroundings of the home 
from the conditions that attend failure to dis¬ 
pose of garbage either through municipal col¬ 
lection or incineration in the home. 

It is surprising that in the whole of the 
Eighteenth District, which consists of the Up¬ 
per Levee, not a single receptacle was found, 
while the West Side Lower Levee, designated 



Yard condition. Manure, garbage and rubbish. 


38 













in this report as the First and Third Districts 
respectively, the proportion of receptacles was 
only 29.38 per cent, for the Lower Levee and 
7.14 per cent, for Upper Levee. The appear¬ 
ance of each of these districts and the fre¬ 
quency of garbage found in yards, cellars, 
streets, alleys, and open spaces was sufficient to 
demonstrate the need for adequate receptacles 


for garbage and the proper collection of such 
garbage at frequent intervals. 

The condition of storage of garbage found 
is so much more to be regretted when we re¬ 
member that on March 26, 1917, Mayor Irvin 
approved an ordinance that reads in part as 
follows: 



Condition of yard. On State St. 


Section I. 

“ 'Garbage' shall be construed to mean all vege¬ 
table or animal matter which is the refuse or offal 
of the food of human beings. 

Section II. 

The owner of every building within the corpo¬ 
rate limits of the City of St. Paul, inhabited, used 
or occupied as a tenement, dwelling-house, lodg¬ 
ing house or hotel, or in which any restaurant or 
lunch-room is conducted, or in which any garbage 
is produced, shall provide and maintain sufficient, 
proper and suitable receptables for receiving and 
holding garbage. Said receptacles shall be of gal¬ 
vanized iron or other metal which will not easily 
rust and can be readily cleaned, and shall be pro¬ 
vided with a close, well-fitting lid of the same ma¬ 
terial, and shall not be less than ten gallons nor 
more than twenty gallons capacity. 


Section III. 

The lid shall always be kept upon such garbage 
receptacles, and when removed for necessary pur¬ 
poses shall be immediately replaced. * * * 

Section IV. 

Section V. 

All garbage receptacles shall be kept on the 
ground floor or yard in the rear of the premises 
at a place easily accessible to the garbage collec¬ 
tor. * * * 

Section VI. 

Any person violating the provisions of this ordi¬ 
nance shall be punished by a fine of not less than 
Five Dollars or more than One Hundred Dollars, 
or by imprisonment for not exceeding ninety days. 


39 





Junk yard surrounded by dwellings. Fire hazard and infested with rats. 


While the ashes do not consti¬ 
tute a menace from the sanitary 
point of view, their presence in 
the yards, cellars, alleys- or 
streets creates a condition which 
merely adds to the already un¬ 
attractive atmosphere of given 
districts. It must be admitted 
that during the winter months it 
is difficult to remove ashes at 
regular intervals, and that the 
snow and ice are a factor in 
promoting the delay of such 
removal. 

Our investigation, however, 
was carried on during the spring 
and part of the summer months 
when the removal of such ashes 
could not be considered difficult. The follow¬ 
ing Table shows the distribution of buildings 
according to provision of storage facilities for 
ashes: 


Table XX. Showing number and propor¬ 
tion of buildings for which ash cans were 


provided. 

Ash 

Can 

No 

Ash Can 

District 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

I 

15 

12.45 

106 

87.55 

II 

38 

13.37 

246 

86.63 

III 



24 

100.00 

IV 

8 

9.51 

76 

90.49 

VIII 

40 

20.74 

153 

79.26 

IX 

52 

31.53 

113 

68.47 

X 

144 

30.57 

327 

69.43 

XI 



60 

100.00 

XII 

104 

31.24 

229 

68.76 

XIV 

52 

19.05 

221 

80.95 

XV 

43 

25.75 

124 

74.25 

XVI 

23 

37.09 

39 

62.91 

XVII 

24 

9.12 

239 

90.88 

XVIII 



87 

100.00 

Total 

543 

20.99 

2,044 

79.01 


The proportion of houses which had provi¬ 
sion for the storage of ashes was 20.99 per 
cent, which is pitifully inadequate. In three 
of the districts studied no ash cans were found, 
on any of the premises examined, and in one 
district only 9.51 per cent, of the buildings and 
yards examined had adequate provision for the 
storage of ashes. 


The fact that the ashes accumulate in yards, 
cellars, and streets is shown in some of our 
photographs, but the serious menace that the 
failure to collect ashes in proper receptacles 
presents is the danger that comes from mix¬ 
ing such ashes with garbage and other perish¬ 
able materials which constitute a danger to 
health through the accumulation of vermin of 
every kind. One of the most serious condi¬ 
tions of accumulation of filth was found in a 
yard where ashes made foundations for a 
dump that was reeking with vermin and where 
the rats were actually terrorizing the neigh¬ 
borhood. 

ACCUMULATION OF RUBBISH AND 
YARD DRAINAGE are essential factors in 
determining the surroundings of the home. 
Where yards do not drain properly and rub¬ 
bish is permitted to accumulate, the conditions 
are bound to become unattractive, making it im¬ 
possible for the families to use the yards and 
driving children into the streets, especially in 
the areas where there are no adequate play¬ 
ground facilities. 

Below is a Table showing the distribution 
of condition of yards according to character 
of drainage and presence of rubbish accord¬ 
ing to districts: 


40 



Table XXI. Shozving the distribution of 
condition of yards according to character of 
drainage—by districts. 

YARD—DRAINAGE* 

Adequate, No 

No Special Infor- 

Pro- Infor- 


Dist. 

Sewer 

Surface 

Prov. 

Swampy Water 

mation 

1 

1.47 

61.02 

12.5 

14.71 

2.94 

7.36 

II 

7.08 

66.95 

.39 

9.45 

8.26 

7.87 

III 


55.56 


33.33 


11.11 

IV 

1.16 

86.06 


6.97 

1.16 

4.65 

VIII 

6.18 

83.72 

.56 

1.68 


7.86 

IX 

5.24 

79.57 




15.19 

X 

7.95 

76.14 




15.91 

XI 


87.18 




12.82 

XII 

.52 

86.98 




12.50 

XIV 


87.54 

.30 

.30 


11.86 

XV 


86.42 




13.58 

XVI 

3.17 

82.56 




14.27 

XVII 

.68 

81.96 




17.36 

XVIII 


94.2 


1.45 


4.35 


— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

_ 

Total 

3.20 

80.59 

.72 

2.06 

.93 

12.48 


*For want of space we have eliminated the numbers and 
used only percentage figures. 


Tables XXI and XXIa show 
that 13.06 per cent, of the yards 
were either encumbered with a 
good deal of rubbish or pre¬ 
sented what might be considered 
a nuisance. Only one-half of 
the yards were entirely free 
from rubbish. The most serious 
conditions were found in the 
West Side Lower Levee and 
Flats, with considerable accumu¬ 
lation in the Upper Levee dis¬ 
trict and under the High Bridge. 

These conditions correspond 
very closely with the general 
condition of the houses in these 
districts mentioned. 

Coupled with the problem of accumulation 
of rubbish is the problem of yard drainage. 
In this respect, as is apparent from Table 
XXIa, the yard drainage was such as to pro¬ 
duce swampy conditions or stagnant pools in 
17.65 per cent, of the yards on the West Side 
Lower Flats, and 33.33 per cent, on the West 
Side Upper Levee. These were perhaps the 
worst districts, and in most instances where 
there was a dump or swampy condition of the 


Table XXIa. Showing the distribution of 
condition of yards according to presence of 
rubbish—by districts. 

YARD—RUBBISH* 

No in¬ 


Dist. 

Free 

Some 

Much 

Nuisance 

formation 

I 

22.8 

33.11 

27.21 

13.22 

3.66 

II 

22.06 

33.85 

22.06 

13.38 

8.65 

III 


44.45 

22.22 


33.33 

IV 

52.31 

24.42 

8.15 

5.81 

9.31 

VIII 

37.65 

34.27 

15.71 

5.62 

6.75 

IX 

50.76 

24.09 

8.91 

5.76 

10.48 

X 

58.27 

15.33 

3.49 

1.16 

21.75 

XI 

55.13 

26.93 

2.56 


15.38 

XII 

52.31 

20.85 

7.81 

5.95 

13.08 

XIV 

62.03 

17.92 

3.95 

1.21 

14.89 

XV 

55.75 

25.62 

3.54 

2.01 

13.08 

XVI 

57.15 

15.86 

6.35 

3.17 

17.47 

XVII 

70.43 

10.51 

.68 

1.02 

17.36 

XVIII 

26.08 

27.56 

26.08 

4.35 

15.93 

Total 

50.83 

22.04 

8.65 

4.41 

14.07 


yard, was also to be found an accumulation of 
rubbish of more or less serious character. 
The inspection of the yards having been made 
long after the snow was off the ground, there 
was no justification of the conditions found on 
the ground of climatic difficulties. The pho¬ 
tographs which we were able to take of exist¬ 
ing conditions are sufficiently explicit as to the 
degree that the accumulation of rubbish might 
reach and need no further comment. 



Yard filled with rags. 


41 







Lighting and Ventilation 


The height and proximity of buildings, the 
orientation of streets, the location of windows, 
all are determining factors in the lighting and 
ventilation of rooms. 



Small bedroom without window, occupied by three adults. 

To have studied the possibilities of improv¬ 
ing the lighting and ventilation of buildings 
from the point of view of possible improve¬ 
ments would have carried us too far afield. In 
a single instance, an attempt to meet the need 



Garbage chutes in air shaft. 


for constructive suggestions was made in the 
case of a large tenement building now under 
the control of one of the most prominent real 
estate men of the city. It was found, however, 
that the building had originally been con¬ 
structed with such faulty lighting and ventila¬ 
tion facilities that changes which would com¬ 
ply with a reasonable standard must exceed in 
cost what would ordinarily be expected to rep¬ 
resent a fair relation between investment and 
return. The owners were therefore advised 
to abandon any plans for improving the light¬ 
ing and ventilation of the building. The small 
proportion of the apartments rented render 
the building a decided liability to the owners. 
The destruction of this structure is bound to 
follow if the land upon which the building now 
stands is to produce the revenue which it is po¬ 
tentially capable of yielding. 

While in many cases a cursory inspection of 
buildings suggests ways and means of improv¬ 
ing the lighting and ventilation without unrea¬ 
sonable expenditures of money, we have for 
reasons of expediency confined our study to 
existing conditions alone. 



Airshaft and court showing elevator, fire escapes 
and garbage chutes. 


42 









LIGHTING. 


When we consider the lighting of the various rooms for which we obtained information, 
we find the following distribution: 


Table XXII. Showing distribution of rooms according to lighting according to type of rooms. 

One Family House. 

Light 

Total Good Fair Gloomy Dark 


Rooms 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

Living 

802 

100 

723 

90.15 

36 

4.49 

40 

4.99 

3 

.37 

Dining 

1,147 

100 

1,003 

87.45 

45 

3.92 

92 

8.02 

7 

.61 

Bed 

4,210 

100 

3,588 

85.22 

218 

5.18 

371 

8.82 

33 

.78 

Kitchen 

1,649 

100 

1,410 

85.51 

86 

5.21 

139 

8.43 

14 

.85 

Bath 

776 

100 

587 

75.66 

24 

3.09 

98 

12.63 

67 

8.62 

Alcove 

23 

100 

17 

73.91 

3 

13.05 

2 

8.69 

1 

4.35 

Hall 

14 

100 

12 

85.71 



2 

14.29 



Attic 

6 

100 

2 

33.33 

3 

50.00 



1 

16.67 

Den 

5 

100 

4 

80.00 



1 

20.00 



Total 

9,380 

100 

8,043 

85.75 

440 

. 4.69 

771 

8.22 

126 

1.34 


\ 





Table 

XXIIa. 

Two family house. 








Two Family House. 











Light 






Total 

Good 


Fair 

Gloomy 


Dark 

Rooms 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

Living 

653 

100 

591 

90.51 

19 

2.91 

42 

6.43 

1 

.15 

Dining 

987 

100 

834 

84.50 

35 

3.54 

112 

11.35 

6 

.61 

Bed 

2,530 

100 

2,061 

81.47 

109 

4.30 

338 

13.36 

22 

.87 

Kitchen 

1,400 

100 

1,183 

84,49 

70 

5.01 

145 

10.36 

2 

.14 

Bath 

905 

100 

685 

72.38 

25 

2.76 

117 

12.93 

108 

11.93 

Parlor 

611 

100 

560 

91.65 

18 

2.94 

33 

5.41 



Alcove 

34 

100 

30 

88.24 

1 

2.94 

2 

5.88 

1 

2.94 

Hall 

3 

100 

2 

66.67 

1 

33.33 





Attic 

7 

100 

5 

71.45 

O 

28.55 





Den 

3 

100 

3 

100.00 








— 

— 

— 

— 


— 


— 

— 

— 

Total 

7,133 

100 

5,924 

83.07 

280 

3.92 

789 

11.05 

140 

1.96 






Table 

XXIIb. 









Tenement House. 










Light 






Total 

Good 

Fair 

Gloomy 


Dark 

Rooms 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

Living 

530 

100 

465 

87.74 

18 3.39 

43 

8.12 

4 

.75 

Dining 

643 

100 

521 

81.04 

28 4.36 

90 

13.98 

4 

.62 

Bed 

1,830 

100 

1,415 

77.33 

80 4.37 

265 

14.48 

70 

3.82 

Kitchen 

1,033 

100 

791 

76.55 

64 6.19 

164 

15.91 

14 

1.35 

Bath 

672 

100 

312 

46.44 

21 3.12 

132 

19.64 

207 

30.80 

Parlor 

362 

100 

324 

89.50 

12 3.32 

25 

6.91 

1 

.27 

Alcove 

50 

100 

35 

70.00 


7 

14.00 

8 

16.00 

Hall 

7 

100 

7 

100.00 






Attic 

4 

100 



1 25.00 

3 

75.00 



Den 

3 

100 

2 

66.67 


1 

33.33 



Total 

5,134 

100 

3,872 

75.41 

224 4.36 

730 

14.22 

308 

6.01 


43 


It is clear from the above figures that of the 
9,380 rooms in single dwellings, only 126 or 
1.34 per cent were dark, the largest proportion 
of which were attic rooms, baths or alcove 
rooms. In the two family houses 140 or 1.96 
per cent, of the rooms were found to be dark 
and in most instances these were also either at¬ 
tic or bath rooms. When, however, we con¬ 
sider the tenements or buildings occupied by 
three or more families, we find that there were 
308 or 6.01 per cent dark rooms. 

While on the whole the proportion of totally 
dark rooms used for habitation was compara¬ 
tively limited, when we consider the rooms 
which were gloomy, which meant use of arti¬ 
ficial light at least during part of the day, we 
find that out of a total of 21,647 rooms, 2,864, 
or 13.26 per cent, were gloomy or totally dark. 
This is especially to be regretted when we find 
that 9.6 per cent, of the bedrooms in single 
dwellings, 14.23 per cent, of the bedrooms in 
two family houses and 18.3 per cent, of the 
bedrooms in tenements were either gloomy or 
dark. It is clear that the tenements are less 
well provided with lighting facilities and that 
the bedrooms in this type of dwellings are 
more frequently without sufficient lighting 
than either the one or two family houses. 




Dark room used for habitation and storage—back of store. 


The kitchens, which are so often used for 
sitting room and bedroom purposes, were also 

found to be poorly 
lighted in a consid¬ 
erable proportion 
of the cases. 

Gloomy and dark 
kitchens constitut¬ 
ed 9.28 per cent., 

10.5 per cent, and 
17.26 per cent, in 
single dwellings, 
two family dwell¬ 
ings and tenements 
respectively. As 
the major part of 
the family activ¬ 
ities are frequent¬ 
ly carried on in the 
kitchen, particular- 
ly during the cold Looki „ g up an air shaft which 

winter months it P rovides and ventilation for 
32 rooms. 

is keenly to be regretted that more than one 
sixth of the kitchens in tenement houses should 
be either gloomy or totally dark. 

It is generally agreed, and many cities have 
translated the agreement into law, that bath 
rooms and toilets need the same lighting facil¬ 
ities per unit of floor space as any other rooms. 
It is surprising, therefore, to find that 21.25 
per cent., 24.86 per cent, and 50.44 per cent, of 
the baths in the single dwellings, two family 
dwellings and tenements respectively, were ei¬ 
ther gloomy or dark. The tenement bath 
rooms, like all other types of rooms being 
lighted inadequately in more than one half of 
the cases. 



44 









VENTILATION 


Where lighting is poor, ventilation is likely 
to be poor. Narrow shafts and such condi¬ 
tions as are revealed by the air wells provided 
in the old tenement houses shown by our photo¬ 
graphs, not alone fail to provide fresh air, but 


present conditions which befoul the air that al¬ 
ready is enclosed by the buildings. 

The following Tables show the distribution 
of rooms according to the condition of ventila¬ 
tion : 


Table XXIII. Showing distribution of rooms according to the condition of ventilation. 

One Family Houses. 


One Family House. Ventilation. 

Total Good Fair Bad None 


Rooms 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

Living 

802 

100 

686 

85.52 

78 

9.74 

38 

4.74 



Dining 

1,147 

100 

989 

86.24 

114 

9.94 

43 

3.74 

1 

.08 

Bed 

4,210 

100 

3,385 

80.43 

517 

12.27 

305 

7.23 

3 

.07 

Kitchen 

1,649 

100 

1,351 

81.94 

183 

11.10 

115 

6.96 



Bath 

776 

100 

604 

77.83 

50 

6.45 

69 

8.89 

53 

6.83 

Parlor 

748 

100 

657 

87.83 

68 

9.09 

23 

3.08 



Alcove 

23 

100 

18 

78.25 

4 

17.40 

1 

4.35 



Hall 

14 

100 

14 

100.00 







Attic 

6 

100 

2 

33.33 

3 

50.00 

1 

16.67 



Den 

5 

100 

4 

80.00 

1 

20.00 





Total 

9,380 

100 

7,710 

82.21 

1,018 

10.84 

595 

6.34 

57 

.61 



Table XXlIIa. 

Two Family Houses. 






Two Family 

House. 




Ventilation. 




Total 

Good 


Fair 


Bad 


None 

Rooms 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

Living 

653 

100 

543 

83.18 

79 

12.09 

30 

4.50 

1 

.15 

Dining 

987 

100 

836 

84.71 

105 

10.63 

45 

4.56 

1 

.10 

Bed 

2,530 

100 

1,973 

77.97 

384 

15.17 

168 

6.67 

5 

.19 

Kitchen 

1,400 

100 

1,102 

78.72 

208 

14.86 

88 

6.28 

2 

.14 

Bath 

905 

100 

672 

74.24 

64 

7.07 

101 

11.17 

68 

7.52 

Parlor 

611 

100 

527 

86.27 

50 

8.17 

34 

5.56 



Alcove 

34 

100 

26 

76.49 

7 

20.57 

1 

2.94 



Hall 

3 

100 

2 

66.67 

1 

33.33 





Attic 

7 

100 

3 

42.86 

3 

42.86 

1 

14.28 



Den 

3 

100 

2 

66.67 

1 

33.33 





Total 

7,133 

100 

5,686 

79.74 

902 

12.61 

468 

6.57 

77 

1.08 



Tabic XXIIIb. 

Three Family Houses. 






Tenement 

Houses. 




Ventilation. 




Total 

Good 


Fair 


Bad 


None 

Rooms 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

No. 

Per Cent 

Living 

530 

100 

419 

79.06 

76 

14.35 

27 

5.08 

8 

1.51 

Dining 

643 

100 

507 

78.86 

78 

12.13 

53 

8.24 

5 

.77 

Bed 

1,830 

100 

1,311 

71.64 

271 

14.81 

228 

12.46 

20 

1.09 

Kitchen 

1,033 

100 

748 

72.43 

176 

17.03 

104 

10.06 

5 

.48 

Bath 

672 

100 

322 

47.93 

55 

8.18 

144 

21.41 

151 

22.48 

Parlor 

362 

100 

309 

85.37 

31 

8.56 

22 

6.07 



Alcove 

50 

100 

38 

76.00 

6 

12.00 

6 

12.00 



Hall 

7 

100 

7 

100.00 







Attic 

4 

100 



3 

75.00 

1 

25.00 



Den 

3 

100 

3 

100.00 







Total 

5,134 

100 

3,661 

71.42 

699 

13.61 

585 

11.40 

189 

3.67 


The above Tables show a total 
of 21,647 rooms with 1,971, or 
9.09 per cent, either without 
ventilation or badly ventilated. 

It must be remembered in this 
connection that in appraising 
the ventilation, account was 
taken only of the possibilities for 
ventilation, and not of the actual 
use of such possibilities. That 
many of the tenants were not 
availing themselves of the ventil¬ 
ating facilities was frequently 
apparent, but as our concern was 
mainly with structural defects, 
the use of ventilation was not 
taken into account. 

The ventilation of rooms in single dwellings 
was everywhere more amply provided for 
than in either two family or tenement dwell¬ 
ings, the proportion of rooms without ventila¬ 
tion being 0.61 per cent., 1.08 per cent, and 
3.67 per cent, in single, two family and tene¬ 
ment dwellings respectively. The proportion 
is still more striking when we consider rooms 
with bad ventilating facilities, as we find 6.34 
per cent., 6.57 per cent, and 11.40 per cent, of 
the rooms with bad ventilating provisions in 
the one family, two family and tenement dwell- 



Milk bottling establishment in filthy cellar. 


view of old type of single dwellings. Note proximity 
of buildings. 


ings. Throughout, it was found that the bath¬ 
rooms were less adequately provided with pos¬ 
sibilities for ventilation than any other rooms, 
and this was especially true of the bath rooms 
located in tenement buildings, where it was 
found that 43.89 per cent, were either entirely 
without ventilation or badly provided with 
means for ventilation. 

The 68 bath rooms without ventilation were 
mainly located in large buildings where sky 
lights were sometimes provided, but often 
these bath rooms were merely closets in which 
a bath tub had been built subsequent to the 
construction of the buildings. That these tubs 
were seldom used was evident. 

That coal, potatoes or vegetables were some 
times stored in these tubs must be admitted, 
but these tubs were of no other practical use, 
especially as in 39 of the cases no hot water 
could be obtained unless it was carried from 
the kitchen into the bath room, which was in¬ 
variably without means of heating. 

To find airshaft ventilation of the worst 
type was unexpected in so small a city as St. 
Paul, but while this condition was limited 
as to numbers it was nevertheless repre- 



Typical rear 


46 













Shack occupied by family with 10 children. 


sentative of what does take 
place when inadequate legisla¬ 
tive control prevails. 

Within recent years various 
types of tenements and so called 
apartment houses have been 
built in the City of St. Paul. It 
is unfortunate that the Building- 
Department of the City does not 
publish any data relating to the 
types of buildings constructed 
every year. A casual inspection, 
however, shows that the three 
and four story tenement is be¬ 
coming increasingly a menace to 
the community, the difference 
between the tenement, as generally understood, 
and the apartment, being mainly in the kinds 
of doors, woodwork, wall paper, lighting fix¬ 


tures, etc. In so far as lighting and ventila¬ 
tion are concerned, the difference seems to be 
very slight. 


SPECIAL LIGHTING STUDY. 


In order to convey some conception of the 
extent of the problem of lighting in the com¬ 
mon type of three story tenement house in re¬ 
lation to adjoining buildings, we have selected 
two typical blocks of buildings, one between 
St. Albans and Dale Sts. on Grand Ave., and 
the other between Summit and Farrington on 
Selby and Dayton Aves. It will be noted that 
all rooms on the inside of the lot and in the 
rear of the lot do not get direct sunshine at 
11 o’clock in the morning, which is the time of 
the maximum sunshine possible on the streets 
considered. The apartments shown in the half 
tones have the smallest exposure to direct sun¬ 
shine, where the proximity of the building is 
such as to interfere with direct sunlight on the 
side of the buildings. The two story build¬ 
ings also are deprived of proper lighting 
and the desirable effects of the rays of the sun. 
That the lots are entirely too deep for proper 
lighting and ventilation can be readily seen by 
a glance at the half tone on page 48. This dif¬ 
ficulty is further emphasized on the north side 
of the block, which is never affected by direct 


sunshine because of the too great occupancy 
of the lot area, as illustrated by the block of 
buildings on Dayton Ave. Such construction 
should be entirely prohibited if the present in¬ 
vestment in so called apartments is not to be¬ 
come the foundation upon which new city 
slums are to find their being. New York’s ex¬ 
perience in land sweating should lead to far 
sighted protection of investors against build¬ 
ing enterprises, the rate of deterioration of 
which is so rapid as to impair the safety of the 
original investment and the whole housing 
standard of the City of St. Paul. The build¬ 
ings shown in the half tones are not cheaper 
because they are crowded upon small lots. 
The cost of material and labor is the same, 
the cost of maintenance is the same or greater, 
and the rate of depreciation more rapid. The 
only economy is in the land. This economy 
does not represent a fixed value except as we 
permit, or do not permit, crowding and land 
sweating. Land values increase in proportion 
as crowding increases. The land sweater in 
one section of the city courts the double offense 


47 









m 


m 

< 

pa 







SUNLIGHT 

AS RELATED TO 

HEIGHT -BUILDINGS 


GtOUf OF AP/UTfUNT HOIMt.S 

JHOWlHG SHADOWS CAST AT IhOO A M- 
OX JHOKJtST AND LONGI5T DAYS- 

TJQ i 


§*• 

m 


w 


• JTUD1LS I5Y-A’A-ntVOft-AtCHtTLCT-JTFAUL 


DAYTON 


AYE. 




S ELBY 


AVE 


SUNLIGHT 

AS RELATED TO 

HEIGHT * BUILDINGS 


GBOUP OF -A PUT HE NT - HOUMA- 

-tTHOWIHG •tfHADOWJ'- CAST- AT- IDOO A M- 
•ON JHOLTIST- AND-LONGUST- DAYS 

¥2 2 



•JTUDlLJ-bY- A- J- DEVQB- MCHITLCT- J T PWl- 


48 




















































































































































■ i 

n n □ 0 

□ □n □ D □ D 

□ LI 

nr “r 

r ii 

□ □ n -m ■ 

b--q -c-o-u-a £ 

w M. 

Mf- "~T 

1 

n n H. 0 

DD D QDOD 

n n 

IDEA 





-FRONT-ELEVATION- 


SUNLIGHT 

AS RELATED TO 

HEIGHT OT BIHIHING5 


ELLV4TION5-AND-PUN OF- 
•TYPICAL THWL STOS.Y- 
■APARTMENT-' BUILDING- 

\fHOWING-JHADOVW CA 5 T AT MOJT- 
-F AV 0 HA 5 LL- HOUR- (A'bOUT IT -00 AM ) 
-AVLUAGE IblTWttN-JHOILT-AND-LONG-DAT- 


-TYPICAL • FLOOR” PLAN” 

•ifTUDlEJ-bT A-6 DLVOl- ARCH IT LCT- S' PAUL- 


SIDE • ELEVATION- 





49 








































































































































































































of lowering standards of buildings occupying 
his own property, and in depriving other land 
owners of the legitimate market for their prop¬ 
erty. Proper distribution of building only dis¬ 


tributes values over a large area in proportion 
as we distribute sunshine and air. Tenements 
and land sweating concentrate values as we re¬ 
duce the sunshine and air in our homes. 



Typical new type of cheap tenement construction. 


50 








The Lodger Problem 


In all housing reform the problems of con¬ 
gestion have been nowhere more acute and 
more difficult to control than where the lodger 
evil has come to interfere with the privacy 
and comfort of the family. This is some¬ 
times due to a desire on the part of the fami¬ 
lies to meet monthly rentals, but the main 
reasons for the lodger evil are to be found in 
the gregarious habits of the foreign elements, 
and the failure on the part of our cities to pro¬ 
vide adequate and reasonably cheap housing 
accommodations for the unmarried workers 
and those who have no family connection in 
the community in which they are working. 

Whatever may be said about other commu¬ 
nities, the failure to provide housing accom¬ 
modations for persons without family con¬ 
nection in the community is one of the most 
neglected aspects of the local problem, both in 
point of actual provisions and from the point 
of view of legislative and administrative con¬ 
trol. In the latter part of this study we shall 
discuss more in detail the existing problem of 
the hotel and rooming house in this city. 

Let us consider for a moment the problem 
of the lodger in the homes which we have been 
able to study in the course of this investiga¬ 


tion. The following table shows the number 
of families with and without lodgers accord¬ 
ing to ownership of homes found in the single 
dwellings and in the apartments. 

Table XXIV. Showing distribution of single 
and multiple dwellings according to ozvner- 
ship and proportion of families with lodgers: 



Renters 


Owners 


Total 


Type 

No 


No 


No 


Dw’lling Lodgers Lodgers Lodgers Lodgers L’dg’rs L’dg'rs 

Single 

743 

278 

699 

174 

1,442 

452 

Multiple 

395 

297 

320 

61 

1,715 

35 b 

Total 

2,138 

575 

1,019 

235 

3,157 

810 



Renters 


Owners 


Total 

Type 

No 


No 


No 

Dw’lling Lodgers Lodgers Lodgers Lodgers L’dg’rs L’dg’rs 

Single 

72.77 

27.23 

80.07 

19.93 

76.14 23.86 

Multiple 

82.45 

17.55 

83.99 

16.01 

83.01 16.99 

Total 

78.81 

21.19 

81.26 

18.74 

79.58 20.42 


This table shows that there is a greater fre¬ 
quency of lodgers among the families living 
in rented houses than among owners, the for¬ 
mer having lodgers in 21.19 per cent, of the 
cases as compared with only 18.74 per cent, 
among the home owning families. It is evident 
however, that the difference is of no great im¬ 
portance. The most interesting fact, how¬ 
ever, shown by these figures is 
the greater frequency of families 
keeping lodgers in rented homes 
in single dwellings, as compared 
with the frequency of families 
keeping lodgers in families rent¬ 
ing apartments in multiple dwell¬ 
ings. It is also evident that the 
owners of multiple dwellings and 
occupying an apartment in such 
dwelling are less likely to keep 
lodgers than if they were owners 
and occupants of single dwell¬ 
ings. 



Basement room occupied by old lady living alone. 


51 




This condition, while in a sense favorable to 
the multiple dwelling, merely indicates that it 
is less convenient to keep lodgers in multiple 
dwellings, both because of the limited floor 
space and because of the difficulty to utilize 
rooms not intended for bedrooms, for lodging 
purposes. 

This fact is more clearly proven when we 


remember that in an earlier part of this report 
it was shown that the bedroom occupancy, not 
to say congestion, was greater in the apart¬ 
ments located in multiple dwellings than in 
single dwellings, despite the fact that there 
is a greater frequency of families with lodgers 
in the latter group of dwellings. 


NATIONALITY AND THE LODGER PROBLEM. 

Table XXV. The relation betiveen nationality and the practice of keeping lodgers has fre¬ 
quently been pointed out in various housing surveys that have been made within recent years in 
this country. To test the extent of the relationship betiveen these two factors in the houses in¬ 
vestigated in the City of Saint Paul the folloiving table was prepared from the data available: 

Renters Owners 




Renters 


Owners 


Families 


Families 


Families 




Families 




With 

Families 

With 

Famliies 

With 

Nationality 

Families Only 

With Lodgers 

FamiliesOnly 


Lodgers 

Only 

Lodgers 

Only 

Lodgers 


No. 

Per Ct. 

No. 

Per Ct. 

No. 

Per Ct. 

No. Per Ct. 





Americans 

317 

78.58 

93 

68.39 

86 

21.42 

43 

31.61 

77.25 

22.75 

66.65 

33.35 

Germans 

244 

61.80 

40 

56.45 

151 

38.20 

31 

43.55 

85.9 

14.1 

82.95 

17.05 

Scandinavian 

240 

69.77 

74 

73.27 

105 

30.23 

27 

26.73 

76.45 

23.55 

79.55 

20.45 

Jews 

156 

56.62 

46 

56.09 

119 

43.38 

36 

43.91 

77.22 

22.78 

76.75 

23.25 

Irish 

130 

73.91 

21 

72.48 

46 

26.09 

8 

27.52 

' 86.18 

13.82 

85.19 

14.81 

Italians 

92 

57.02 

43 

60.56 

69 

42.98 

28 

39.44 

68.15 

31.85 

71.15 

28.85 

Negro 

64 

85.29 

32 

78.04 

11 

14.71 

9 

21.96 

66.65 

33.35 

55.00 

45.00 

French 

55 

83.32 

27 

74.96 

11 

16.68 

9 

25.04 

67.05 

32.95 

55.00 

45.00 

Russian 

49 

71.01 

24 

72.73 

20 

28.99 

9 

27.27 

67.14 

32.86 

68.99 

31.01 

Poles 

44 

64.74 

19 

79.16 

24 

35.26 

5 

20.84 

69.9 

30,1 

82.76 

17.24 

English 

34 

87.26 

7 

87.50 

5 

12.74 

1 

12.50 

82.9 

17.1 

83.34 

16.66 

Syrians 

25 

73.48 

4 

80.00 

9 

26.52 

1 

20.00 

86.21 

13.79 

90.00 

10.00 

Bohemians 

21 

42.00 



29 

58.00 



100.00 


100.00 


Roumanians 

17 

68.00 

12 

80.01 

8 

32.00 

3 

19.99 

58.65 

41.35 

72.75 

27.25 

Hungarians 

16 

69.00 



7 

31.00 



100.00 


100.00 


Scotch 

15 

79.95 

3 

100.00 

4 

20.05 



83.32 

16.68 

100.00 


Mixed 

401 

71.52 

141 

75.04 

159 

28.48 

47 

24.96 

73.98 

26.02 

77.19 

22.81 

Total 

1,920 

69.92 

586 

71.53 

863 

30.08 

257 

28.47 

76.65 

23.35 

77.08 

22.92 


This table is in most striking contrast to the 
ordinary conception of the lodger evil in rela¬ 
tion to racial and national groups. Consider¬ 
ing the families occupying rented homes, we 
find that 586 families out of 2,506 families 
or 23.35 per cent keep lodgers. This propor¬ 
tion is only slightly above the proportion of 
families with lodgers classed as American, the 
latter having a proportion of 22.75 per cent 
families with lodgers. The largest proportion 
of families with lodgers was found among 
the Hungarians who occupy rented dwellings, 
and the smallest proportion of such families 
was found amoung the Irish tenants. In the 


case of the Hungarians, however, the figures 
do not have any potent significance because of 
the very limited number of families of this na¬ 
tional group, while in the case of the Irish, the 
figures are sufficiently large to indicate the 
trend of the general distribution of lodgers in 
such families. 

The other national and racial groups which 
stand out in relation to the frequency of keep¬ 
ing lodgers are the Negroes, French, Russians, 
Italians and Poles in the order of their impor¬ 
tance. In all these groups the families kept 
lodgers in more than 30 per cent of the cases. 


52 


When we consider the distribution of lodg¬ 
ers in the families owning their homes we find 
that the American families stand out as keep¬ 
ing lodgers in 33.35 per cent of the cases as 
compared with only 22.92 per cent of foreign 
families owning their own homes and keeping- 
lodgers. With the exception of the Negro and 
French families, the American families own¬ 
ing their homes seem to show a greater fre¬ 
quency of lodgers than any of the other na¬ 
tional and racial groups. The problem of the 
negro in securing adequate housing accommo¬ 
dations leads to crowding and no doubt adds 
to the lodger evil. 


On the whole, evidence that we have gath¬ 
ered in the course of this inquiry shows that 
the lodger evil is far from representing the 
acute problem that we ordinarily find in the 
eastern cities, but as we shall point out later 
the transient character of the lodger popula¬ 
tion in St. Paul, and the failure on the part of 
the City or business interests to meet the local 
need for accommodating the floating labor has 
created a rooming house and hotel problem 
that is as serious as any that can be found in 
the congested areas of the eastern industrial 
centers. 


SIZE OF FAMILY AND LODGERS. 


It is generally conceded that lodgers add 
to the congestion of the home and interfere 
with the privacy of its members. The follow¬ 


ing table gives some conception of the relation¬ 
ship between the size of the family and the 
number of lodgers. 


Table XXVI. 


Showing the number and proportion of lodgers according to the size of the family: 


No. 












* 


Lodgers 

i 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 10 

n 

12 13 

15 17 


Size 

Families 












Totals 

Per Ct. 

1 

24 

31 

n 

6 

2 

3 

2 

1 

2 2 


i 

244 

10.81 

2 

113 

50 

16 

16 

8 

5 

5 

2 

3 2 

2 

i i 

540 

23.96 

3 

99 

56 

23 

7 

3 

7 

2 

3 

2 2 

2 

i 

481 

21.30 

4 

97 

44 

23 

9 

5 

4 

4 

3 

1 

1 

i 

2 454 

20.15 

5 

61 

28 

14 

7 

1 

3 

1 

1 


1 

l 

248 

10.89 

6 

29 

17 

8 

7 


2 

1 

1 


L 


1 169 

7.49 

7 

24 

7 

1 

2 

1 

1 






60 

2.66 

8 

12 

2 

6 

1 








38 

1.68 

9 

7 




2 







17 

.75 

10 












2 

.09 

11 





1 







5 

.22 

Total 

486 

235 

102 

55 

23 

25 

15 

11 

7 8 

6 

4 2 

2 1 2,258* 

100.00 

^Thirty-five lodgers in 

families size 

of which 

was not ascertained 

accurately. 



Table XXVI shows that lodgers are 

most 


the families 

as to the lodgers who prefer to 

common in 

families with 

few children 

or at 


live in 

small families. 




least that 55.98 per cent of the lodgers lived 
in families of three persons only, and that if 
we add the families with four persons who 
also keep lodgers, they accommodate 76.11 per 
cent of the total number of lodgers found in 
the course of this survey. The keeping of lodg¬ 
ers in large families is evidently not popular, 
and in all probability this lack of popularity 
of lodgers in large families is due as much to 


Whatever the direct cause of the practice of 
keeping lodgers in families may be, it would 
seem that the size of the family with its econ¬ 
omic problem of food and payment of rent, 
which are the essentials of all expenditures in 
wage earning families, have no very telling ef¬ 
fect upon the frequency of lodgers in such fam¬ 
ilies. 


53 




LODGERS AND RENTS. 


In order to ascertain the influence that the 
keeping of lodgers may have upon the rental 
rates in various districts in dwellings of dif¬ 
ferent sizes, whether they be in single or 
multiple dwellings, the following tables were 
prepared from the available data: 

Table XXVII. Showing distribution of rents 
according to type of dwelling and district on 
basis of distribution of families with or with¬ 
out lodgers: 

Apartments Houses 


District 

I 

Family 

Only 

1.78 

Families 

With 

Lodgers 

1.44 

Family 

Only 

2.56 

Families 

With 

Lodgers 

1.63 

District 

II 

2.68 

2.91 

2.05 

1.76 

District 

III 

.48 

.44 

1.90 

1.43 

District 

IV 

2.17 

2.30 

2.32 

2.38 

District 

VIII 

4.40 

3.49 

3.87 

4.54 

District 

IX 

3.39 

2.26 

2.59 

1.30 

District 

X 

3.00 

2.58 

2.48 

2.61 

District 

District 

XI 

XII 

2.35 

3.06 

3.08 

.72 

2.89 

.78 

2.97 

District 

XIV 

2.52 

2.50 

2.01 

1.60 

District 

XV 

2.72 

2.42 

2.52 

2.47 

District 

XVI 

3.45 

3.25 

3.05 

.3.04 

District 

XVII 

2.74 

3.71 

3.21 

2.98 

District 

XVIII 

1.61 

1.19 

1.07 

1.00 


Table XXVIIa. Showing distribution of 
rents according to size of divelling on basis of 
distribution of families with or without lodg¬ 
ers: 


Apartments Houses 

Families Families 


No. of 

Family 

With 

Family 

With 

Rooms 

Only 

Lodgers 

Only 

Lodgers 

2 

2.73 

3.27 

5.50 

1.00 

3 

3.57 

2.69 

3.87 

2.51 

4 

2.83 

2.85 

2.65 

1.78 

5 

2.80 

2.62 

2.67 

2.55 

6 

2.84 

2.90 

2.63 

2.79 

7 

2.25 

1.93 

2.18 

2.90 

8 

4.38 

2.95 

2.25 

2.72 

9 

2.22 

3.00 

2.42 

3.13 

10 

2.50 



2.86 

11 



2.55 

2.69 

12 

1.67 


.71 

1.67 

13 

.38 


.77 

2.57 

14 




2.14 


15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 2.00 


In the above tables the classification was 
based on per room rental in order to facilitate 
comparison between the various sizes of 
dwellings and to make the comparison by dis¬ 
tricts more easily perceptible. These figures, 
of course, eliminate all homes owned by the 
occupants as it would not have been safe to 
make estimates of rentals. 

When we consider the figures in Table 
XXVII we find that the distribution of rental 
rates varies considerably with the location of 
the districts. The Eighth District, which is 
by no means one of the best, shows the high¬ 
est rentals. This district is not only con¬ 
gested, but from the point of view of sanitary 
facilities it is one of the worst. The new 
changes in the railroad trackage will do 
away with a good share of this district. Dis¬ 
tricts Twelve, Sixteen and Seventeen, which 
also represent high rental rate, are, as will 
be seen from the map on page 10, not among 
the best districts, and yet the rentals are quite 
high. The most surprising fact, however, is 
the lack of any clearly definable relationship 
between the frequency of the practice of keep- 



Egress for 75 persons. Hall obstructed. 


54 






ing lodgers and rentals per room. That 
there is some relation between the type of 
district and the number of lodgers in such 
districts is evident from the following table: 

Table XXVIII. Showing the distribution 
of lodgers according to districts: 

Lodgers 




No. 

Per Cent 

District 

I 

102 

4.45 

District 

II 

212 

9.26 

District 

III 

30 

1.31 

District 

IV 

73 

3.18 

District 

VIII 

702 

30.59 

District 

IX 

215 

9.37 

District 

X 

323 

14.09 

District 

XI 

49 

2.14 

District 

XII 

281 

12.26 

District 

XIV 

80 

3.48 

District 

XV 

70 

3.06 

District 

XVI 

77 

3.36 

District 

XVII 

51 

2.23 

District 

XVIII 

28 

1.22 

Total 


2,293 

100.00 


These figures show that the larger number 
of lodgers was found in the district that is 
about to be demolished by the railroad, and 
that the Ninth and Tenth districts are also 
affected by lodgers. All three of these dis¬ 
tricts are among the worst in this City, while 
the First, Second and Twelfth are made up 
of homes owned and occupied by squatters or 
are generally in bad condition. 

This close relationship between the charac¬ 
ter of the neighborhood and the number of 
lodgers is, of course, significant, and observa¬ 
tion has shown that many of the homes where 
lodgers are kept are generally in bad condi¬ 
tion of repair aside from being located in de¬ 
teriorated neighborhoods. 

The proximity of these districts to the rail¬ 
roads, shows the need for better accommoda¬ 
tions of railroad employees, a need which has 
been definitely recognized by the railroads 
but which they have failed to meet except in 
one or two instances. These provisions are 
wholly inadequate, and in at least one case, 
not better than some of the worst of the lodg¬ 



Box-car sleeping quarters. 


ing houses of the City, as is shown by photo¬ 
graphs embodied in this report. 

The large number of homes in which lodg¬ 
ers are kept, and the large number of lodgers 
who are housed in the area about to be torn 
down by the railroads, raises another problem 
of housing which in some way should be met 
if the present conditions of more or less nor¬ 
mal room occupancy is not to degenerate into 
a very serious problem of congestion. When 
the properties occupied at the present time by 
families and lodgers are torn down, these 
families will have to seek other places of 
habitation. While there are in some sec¬ 
tions many homes that are standing idle, 
there is no doubt that the families in the area 
to be removed will move to the nearest sec¬ 
tions and will take no steps to change their 
place of residence beyond a limited area in 
the vicinity of their present habitation. 

How to meet this situation will be pointed 
out at the end of this report. That a machin¬ 
ery for locating families is necessary can 
hardly be doubted, especially if we consider 
the fact that there is no very material differ¬ 
ence in the rental rates in good and poor 
homes, in so far as repair is concerned, and 
that there is a very large proportion of homes 
that are at present unoccupied. 


55 





The Lodging, Rooming Houses and Hotels 

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. 


It has been pointed out in the section on “The 
Lodger Problem” that the extent of the practice 
of keeping lodgers does not present a very se¬ 
rious evil in the City of St. Paul. If, however, 
the problem is not serious in the private homes 
where lodgers are kept, conditions found in the 
rooming and lodging houses, ninety of which 
were covered in the course of this inquiry, re¬ 
vealed a local situation which in lack of sani¬ 
tary and safety facilities can hardly be sur¬ 
passed by any other city in the United States. 

As the investigation pro¬ 
gressed, various aspects of the 
problem came to light, but the 
limitation of time and the feel¬ 
ing that such problems as prosti¬ 
tution and illegal liquor traffic 
were rather removed from hous¬ 
ing as it is ordinarily under¬ 
stood, these phases have not been 
taken under consideration. That 
the character of some of the 
rooming houses and hotels 
studied was such as to unfit 
them for other than illicit use 
was quite evident. 

Some conception of the extent of the investi¬ 
gation of rooming houses and hotels may be 
gained from the following table: 

Table XXIX. Shozving lodging houses in¬ 
vestigated according to number of rooms and 
total rooms. 

Total Number each 

Number of Rooms Size of Hotel Total Number Rooms 


6-10 

10 

91 

11-20 

33 

566 

21-30 

16 

480 

31 and over 

31 

1432 

Total 

90 

2569 


Ninety hotels and rooming houses selected 
from the 150 hotels and licensed rooming 
houses in the city represent 60 per cent, of the 
total. In our study we made an effort to in¬ 
clude all types of establishments in order to 
show the extent of the present inefficiency of 


the inspection system, which is no doubt due to 
inadequate appropriation and the recent 
changes in the organization of the Hotel 
Inspection Department as a part of the De¬ 
partment of Oil Inspection. Forty seven of 
the establishments examined contained more 
than twenty rooms and the total of such es¬ 
tablishments contained 19120, or 74.42 per 
cent, of all the rooms examined. In other 
words, whatever conditions were found re¬ 
lated mainly to large establishments. What 


the existing conditions were we shall point out 
shortly, but before we enter upon a discussion 
of conditions we must say a word about the 
prices charged. This is made necessary by the 
frequent statement in defense of the poor con¬ 
dition in hotels and rooming houses that there 
must be some place for the men and women 
who cannot pay more than five or ten cents a 
night. That such a place may be necessary is 
not to be doubted, but whether the strikingly 
poor conditions that exist are due to low rates 
needs corroborative evidence. 

In order to present in detail the classifica¬ 
tion of rates according to sizes of establish¬ 
ments and classification of rooms the follow¬ 
ing table was compiled from the original rec¬ 
ords made in the field. Unoccupied and dor¬ 
mitory rooms were excluded. 



Rooming house shack in Midway district. 





Table XXX. Showing classification of establishments studied according to size of establishment } 
rates and location of rooms in relation to lighting: 


Size of 

Total 

No. 




Cost Per 

Room 

Per 

Night 




Lodging Rented 

Rooms 

15c 


20c 

25c 


30c 

35c 


40c 

House Outside 

Inside 

Out. 

In. 

Out. In. 

Out. 

In. 

Out. 

In. 

Out. 

In. 

Out. 

In. 

6-10 Rooms 

65 

8 

2 



17 

3 


1 

7 

2 



11-20 Rooms 

382 

123 




22 

13 

5 


26 

8 

41 

3 

21-30 Rooms 

332 

117 




2 

23 

4 


15 

13 

19 

2 

Over 30 Rms. 

978 

398 

32 

6 

26 61 

8 

79 

34 

23 

81 

27 

47 

7 

Total 

1,757 

646 

34 

6 

26 61 

49 

118 

43 

24 

129 

50 

107 

12 


*2 of which are INSIDE RMS. t 9 of which are INSIDE RMS. 


Size of 50c 60c 75c 


Lddging House 

Out. 

In. 

Out. 

In. 

Out. 

In. 

6-10 Rooms 

15 

2 

1 


S 


11-20 Rooms 

61 

62 

14 

2 

49 

20 

21-30 Rooms 

18 

49 

19 


46 

17 

Over 3QRooms 

119 

123 

53 

o 

92 

29 

Total 

213 

236 

87 

4 

lp2 

66 


$1.00 


$1.50 


$2.00 

$3.00 

Out. 

In. 

Out. 

In. 

Out. 

In. Out. In. 

10 






92 

10 

35 


4 

4 3 

130 

12 

1 

1 

2 


263 

25 

48 

4 

17 

3 5 

495 

47 

84 

5 

23 

3 9 3 


Perhaps the most interesting fact revealed 
by this table is the large proportion of inside 
rooms which totaled 646 or 26.88 per cent, 
of all the single rooms examined. This aston¬ 
ishingly large proportion of inside rooms was 
located in most instances so that artificial 
lighting only was possible. The ventilation, 
as will be shown later, was also difficult or 
impossible. 

When we consider the rates charged for 
these rooms we find that out of a total of 1491 
outside rooms only 109, or 6.35 per cent, were 
rented at rates of 25 cents or less, and that 
there were no rooms' renting for 10 cents per 
night. In the case of the inside rooms it was 
found that those renting for 25 cents per night 
or less amounted to 185 out of a total of 635 
inside rooms, or 29.13 per cent. These propor¬ 
tions would seem to indicate that the cheap 
rooms are mostly inside rooms, quite undesir¬ 
able and as we shall see from later discussion, 
in many cases quite unfit for occupancy. The 
largest proportion of the rooms in these sec¬ 


ond and third rate hotels and rooming houses 
were of the type renting for between 30 and 
50 cents per night. In this group we found 
50.68 per cent, of the inside rooms and 32.95 
per cent, of the outside rooms. These figures 
do not seem to warrant the argument that the 
cheap lodging house and hotel with its dispro¬ 
portionate number of inside rooms is run for 
the benefit of the poor who can not afford to 
pay more than 10 cents per night. If such a 
need does exist it is clear from the above fig¬ 
ures that it is not being met. 

Perhaps the worst conditions were found 
in the dormitory rooms of which twenty in all 
were examined. In these twenty dormitory 
rooms, of which 3 were inside dark rooms, 223 
beds were found, and of this number of beds 
149 rented at 15 cents per night, the balance 
renting at from 20 to 50 cents per night. The 
condition of the beds and bedding in some 
of these dormitories is a menace to the health 
of the occupants, and some of our photo¬ 
graphs, altho faithful to the conditions, fail to 


57 




reveal the true conditions of 
ventilation, lighting and clean¬ 
liness, or rather the lack of all 
of these. 

As it was stated at the begin¬ 
ning of this chapter, it is not our 
intention to deal in this report 
with the liquor problem or the 
problems of immorality. A 
close study of the conditions, 
however, reveals the fact that a 
conservative estimate of 50 per 
cent, of the hotels and rooming 
houses in the City of St. Paul 
derive either one-half or the 
whole of their income from ille¬ 
gal liquor selling and from the 
traffic of prostitution carried on either directly 
by the owners or managers, or simply by rent¬ 
ing rooms to street walkers who utilize them 
for immoral purposes. 

An analysis of the physical conditions of the 
buildings shows a remarkable fire hazard 
which is easily controllable under the State 
laws, an unusual amount of neglect to control 
sanitary conditions which are under the juris¬ 
diction of the State Hotel Inspector, and gen¬ 
eral health conditions which could easily be 
controlled by the Health Department of the 
City of St. Paul. 

While the statistical data presented in this 
report gives some impression of the conditions 


Shack converted into hotel in Midway district. 

that exist, the field notes made in the course 
of the investigation are perhaps more valuable 
in presenting a diagnosis of the situation than 
the statistics which we have been able to 
gather. It is for this reason that some of the 
field notes have been copied in their original 
form with such abbreviations as seemed im¬ 
material in presenting an accurate picture of 
the conditions. It should be remembered that 
these statements in many instances have been 
verified and police records examined. Any 
one personally interested in ascertaining the 
hotels to which reference is made in the fol¬ 
lowing notes can obtain such information 
through the Real Estate Board of the St. Paul 
Association or through the Wilder Charity. 


NOTES TAKEN ON LODGING HOUSES AND HOTELS 


-,-E. 7th St. 

Ten dark inside rooms out of a total of 
eighteen rooms. 

-,-E. 7th St. 

When we came to proprietor’s kitchen, 
found four girls—not in street attire. 
Notice scale prices; $1.00 is charged for 
an inside room and $1.50 for one little 
better than an inside room. 

-, —— Jackson St. 

No fire escapes on third floor, wooden 
steps down to ground from second floor, 
rear. Roof is old and leaks. Proprie¬ 


tress called investigator “DEAR” in an¬ 
swering questions. No sitting or recrea¬ 
tion rooms. 

-,-E. 7th St. 

This woman—who looks like a sport— 
says she is continuing the place “tempo¬ 
rarily.” That the owners asked her to 
keep it until “changes are made.” It 
may be she has been raided by the police. 
She has a “Furnished Rooms” sign in the 
window, the place looks decidedly sus¬ 
picious and she reluctantly let investiga¬ 
tor look things over. 


r>s 

















-,-E. 5th St. 

Place was raided some months ago as 
a disorderly house. No sitting room. 
-, - St. Peter St. 

Disorderly place. She may have 3 
roomers by the week, but all other rooms 
are evidently rented over and over again 
to transient couples off the street. 
-, - S. Wabasha St. 

For bed-bug conditions this place is one 
of the worst. Proprietor frankly says 
building should be condemned. It is an 
old-time wooden structure, without fire 
escapes. In the yard is a long wooden 
stable which adds greatly to the fire haz¬ 
ard. Proprietor says he would not sleep 
in the rooms himself because of the bugs. 
-,-W. Exchange St. 

Notwithstanding this is a wooden 
structure 3 stories, all the fire escapes 
there are is an iron ladder in the rear. 
Wife of proprietor says owner positively 
will not make needed repairs, and frankly 
says the building should be condemned so 
as to force owner to act. 

-,-St. Peter St. 

Three prostitutes appeared from as 
many rooms, evidently looking for trade. 
When proprietor showed investigator 
around later, she deftly omitted showing 
these rooms from which the women 
emerged. 

-,-W. 7th St. 

This place is in an old, falling-into-de- 
cay building where there is considerable 
fire hazard—yet no fire escapes. 

-,-Exchange St. 

This place has had an unsavory reputa¬ 
tion in the past as being rooming place of 
so-called “high-class” sporting women 
and kept women. 

-,-Wabasha St. 

Proprietor is a fat, coarse, talking and 
acting woman, going around in a kimona. 
Her manners are those of a “Madam.” 


Regarding extra dark, miserably ven¬ 
tilated inside rooms on third floor, cham¬ 
bermaid explained: “Oh, these rooms are 
all right if the girls wants to stay in 
here a little while.” There are four in¬ 
side rooms not fit for use as sleeping 



Steep stairway in down town hotel. 


rooms. Back yard is extra dreary and 
dirty. She has no definite business stand¬ 
ards—for instance—a rear room 8x10 
with single bed is placed at $1.50. This 
to investigator is conclusive proof that 
she is not running a legitimate hotel. The 
only fire escapes are wooden stairs in rear 
—not adequate. Paper and rubbish has 
been thrown out back of a restaurant, in¬ 
creasing fire risk. A passageway out to 
W. 9th St. would be very difficult to find 
at night and especially if a fire was on, 
and yard full of smoke. 

-, - University Ave. 

When it is remembered that from 160 
to 300 rough men center in here from 
the various sleeping places, the washroom 
can be imagined and the towels which are 


59 
























Rear exit of hotel. Gate locked. 


like those in a fourth class 
printing office. 

-, -University Ave, 

In rear of about - 

University Ave. with same 
proprietor. Their beds are 
placed 20 inches apart up 
under slant roof. On hot 
afternoons the air is vile. 

It is inhuman to ask thirty 
men to sleep in such a place. 

Men wash at another hotel. 

Place in which men sleep is 
fully as bad as anything we 
have found in the city, build¬ 
ing is wooden, ramshackle 
and has rickety outside 
stairs. One man told me 
that many men move simply because they 
cannot endure such sleeping conditions. 
The first floor is in such extra bad repair 
it is not used now. Windows boarded up. 
One in passing would never imagine 
house is used at all. Over large room 
has been written in chalk “Hotel de Bum”. 
Outside downstairs some one has chalked: 
“All who inter this home leave all hop be- 
hinde.” A refuge comparable with the 
famous sewer lodgings of Paris. 

Annex- 

Investigator found beds all torn up. 
Man who takes care of rooms said had 
been burning sulphur—“to kill bugs.” 
Air was still so bad one could hardly 
breathe. This man said; “Pretty rotten, 
huh?” Evidence of much drinking in 
rooms. 

Annex- 

It would hardly be possible to over¬ 
state conditions in this Annex and one 

side of Annex-. There are no fire 

escapes. Paper and rubbish in hall—in¬ 
creasing fire risk. From number of 
whisky bottles it is evident there is much 
drinking in rooms. 

-, - Minnesota St. 

No sitting writing-recreation room. 

-,-E. 7th St. 

This place is run by two women. The 


one who showed investigator round is the 
confidential sort and decidedly suspicious. 
Wanted investigator to “send her some 
business.” Without doubt her second 
floor rooms are rented to transient cou¬ 
ples. She was wholly unable to explain 
how it comes she charges $1.00 for a nice 
large room with two great big windows 
and the same for a 6x8 room. No sitting 
room. 

-,-E. 8th St. 

An assignation house. In most all 
rooms may be seen the little wash basin 
used by women. While investigator and 
proprietor were talking by the office, a 
painted prostitute stepped into stairway 
with a man. Seeing us he fled. When in¬ 
vestigator came down in a minute and 
passed out, she ran after her victim, 
pulled his coat, trying to induce him to 
come with her—but he refused, where¬ 
upon she cursed him. This in broad day¬ 
light. Proprietor claims he has men 
roomers. 

-,-E. 7th St. 

Proprietor would have investigator be¬ 
lieve he has laboring men roomers. Pro¬ 
prietors of lodging houses around him 
say he has a few rough fellows on 4th and 
3rd floors, but caters to the “Couple 
Trade”—many of them disreputables. 


60 

















-,-W. 7th St. 

There are no fire escapes. Brick build¬ 
ing. Wash rooms, poor condition. Roller 
towels. Evidently much drinking going- 
on. Empty beer cases about in halls. 
Men staggering up to their rooms. 
-, -Minnesota St. 

Proprietor was in a hurry to say he has 
“most all men roomers.” This place for¬ 
merly was raided at different times and 
has frequently changed hands. 

--, — E. 8th St. 

This dirty place certainly does not de¬ 
serve the name “Hotel.” It is a fire trap. 
Men asleep in little coops on 4th floor 
would not have one chance in a hundred 
to escape, should fire! break out. The 
whole building is a make-shift, an old 
wooden structure made over—making it 
exceedingly difficult to keep clean. This 

proprietor owns also the-which 

has often had trouble with the police. 

-,-E. 7th St. 

To stow away 62 men in 12 rooms and 
in such foul conditions is criminal. In¬ 
vestigator would consider Fire Marshal 
could stop use until changes are made. 
Wooden steps in rear to ground only fire 
escape. In case of fire men would be 
trapped in inside rooms like rats. Inside 
rooms, roller towels (foul condition) and 
vermin. In two rooms they were burn¬ 
ing sulphur. 

-,-Jackson St. 

No fire escapes. Rope appliance in sev¬ 
eral rooms so occupant may lower himself 
to ground. Wooden steps from 2d floor 
to ground in rear. 

-, - E. 6th St. 

The place has had trouble with police 

(been raided when called the -. 

Fined in court as disorderly house). Pro¬ 
prietor says he caters only to married 
transient couples. No regular sitting, 
writing, recreation rooms. 

-,-E. 5th St. 

Was closed for a year under Abate¬ 
ment Law. Gas is used. Man lost his 
life about month ago—overcome by gas. 


-, - Vandalia. 

No fire escapes. Lamps are used in 
hotel and shacks. Whisky bottles all 
around and 5 cases empty beer bottles in 
entry of hotel. Roller towels (filthy con¬ 
dition) are used in defiance of State Law. 

-, - Hampden. 

These Midway Hotels are all run on 
about the same plan. Many rooms have 
large whisky bottles. 13 regular beds and 
3 singles up in attic right under roof. 

-, -E. 3rd St. 

Women there—Chief said they hung 
out windows. Gave warning to manager. 

-,-Rosabel St. 

No fire escapes. 

-, -E. 8th St. 

This old woman (in explaining cancel¬ 
lation of license) frankly admits she let 
immoral women frequent the place and 
bring men there. 

-,'-E. 7th St. 

Serious fire hazard. Movies on first 
floor. Fire broke out in picture show and 
threatened building. 

-,-W. 4th St. 

Big fire risk. 

-, -- E. 3rd St. 

A marked fire hazard. 

-,-Como Ave. 

Grave fault is that many of the locks 
are old, could scarcely unlock door. In 
case of fire this might cause loss of life. 

--, - Wabasha St. 

Charitable Institution has long been 
known as not conforming to standards. 
Old Opera House made over. Fire Mar¬ 
shal condemned it. Sleeping rooms were 
found on either side of dirty toilets. 

-.-Jackson St. 

Restaurant in this place called “- 

-” and one can feel the free and easy 

conditions of hotel upstairs. Much drink¬ 
ing in rooms. 

-,-Wabasha St. 

Four people sleep in some of the inside 
rooms during rush times. 


61 












































-,-Wabasha St. 

This is unquestionably one of the dirt¬ 
iest places, morally, in town. There are 
ten inside rooms. The yard needs atten¬ 
tion. 

-,-St. Peter St. 

Few hotels are better fitted out or bet¬ 
ter kept. It is unfortunate that the moral 
condition is so much below the physical 
condition. 

-,-E. 7th St. 

Building is old, everything dirty. No 
chamber maids employed—beds made by 
men. Roller towels. In several rooms 
the sunlight never enters. 

--E. 3rd St. 

There are no rooms,—simply cots. 
One water closet of two compartments 
may accommodate 100 men. In winter 
men pay 10 cents to sleep on floor of of¬ 
fice. Roof leaks terribly. Rear windows 
nailed at top, increasing fire risk. 

-,-E. 7th St. 

No fire escapes. Manager explains 

they do not need them, since the men can 
escape to roof of adjacent building and 
go over two or three buildings where they 
will find fire escape to ground. No wash 
room on 4th floor. One on 3rd floor. 
-,-W. 4th St. 

It rises in the rear to 3 stories. Fire 
trap. Narrow wooden stairs. Abso¬ 
lutely no protection against fire. Smoky, 
dirty lamps used. The proprietor has 
been arrested many times for violating 
liquor laws. 

-, - Minnesota St. 

Investigator learns license was cancel¬ 
led because of bad moral conditions. 
While they are supposed to rent only by 
the week, it seems some rooms are still 
rented by the day to transient couples. 
- Camp near Midway Transfer. 

This camp has sleeping quarters in 5 
cars on a siding. One car contains 20 
bunks (singles) in doubledeck iron 
frames. There are 16 little windows 2x2 
(screened) and side doors are left open 
for ventilation. Bunks dirty, poorly cared 


for. One car has 18 double-deck frames 
containing double beds accommodating 4 
men each, 32 in car. 8 little windows, 18 
inches by 24 inches. But one side door 
open. Dirty, poor beds. Another car has 
provision for 32 men. Regular sized 
beds, double deck. Car about 10x55 ft. 
8 small (18x24 inches) windows and one 
door left open. One mattress badly torn. 
Beds bad condition. The next car is 
smaller, 9x36 ft. Contains 24 bunks. 
Has but four little windows (2y 2 x2y 2 ). 
Doors open. Roof of car is low. Man 
who showed -me around admits bunks 
have bugs in them. He says the average 
time a man stays is less than 10 days— 
that men come and go. The fifth car is 
same size and style as the 4th—provision 
for 24 men. Only three 2^4x2^4 win¬ 
dows and an end window 2x4 is screened. 
Only one side door open. A yard toilet 
structure is used by some 80 men, and is 
in rankest condition—a positive nuisance. 
Men wash in a long, low wooden trough. 
Roller towels extra dirty.” 

If, as it appears from the above statements, 
a considerable share of the rooming house and 
hotel accommodations in the City are used for 
illicit purposes, the problem is not one of short¬ 
age of accommodations, but one of weeding 
out unnecessary and obnoxious establish¬ 
ments, an intensive vigilance, and a control of 
the remaining establishments which do, so far 
as possible an honest business. This would re¬ 
duce much of the fire hazard and save consid¬ 
erable in the difficulties now encountered by 
State and City officials in the control of vice 
and the liquor traffic. 

That the war should be a strong impetus in 
stimulating drastic action is recognized by 
every one. If we are to retain our training 
camps and assist in maintaining a high stand¬ 
ard of efficiency among the men who have 
come to this City for purposes of military 
training, the first step in the direction of in¬ 
creasing the control over the present situation, 
in so far as drink and morality are concerned, 
is the closing up of superfluous and law break¬ 
ing hotels and rooming houses in the City of 
St. Paul. 


62 

















LIGHT AND VENTILATION. 


The problems of light and ventilation in ho¬ 
tels and rooming houses are mainly structural. 
The occupants do, of course, determine for 
themselves as to whether they care to use the 
existing ventilating facilities when such ven¬ 
tilation is to be provided by means of doors 


and windows; but the inadequacy of the provi¬ 
sions for both lighting and ventilation depends 
upon the character of the building and its lo¬ 
cation in relation to other buildings. The fol¬ 
lowing Table shows the distribution of rooms 
according to light and ventilation. 


Table XXXI. 


Showing distribution of rooms according to light and ventilation by size of 
establishment: 


Number of 


Light 


Ventilation 


Rooms in House 

Light 

No Light 


Good 


Fair 


Bad 

Very Bad 


No. 

% 

No. 

% 

No. 

% 

No. 

% 

No. 

% 

No. 

% 

6-10 

48 

76.18 

15 

23.82 

27 

42.82 

13 

20.64 

11 

17.47 

12 

19.07 

11-20 

401 

75.34 

131 

24.66 

326 

61.25 

67 

12.60 

27 

5.07 

112 

21.08 

21-30 

283 

72.46 

108 

27.54 

267 

68.29 

12 

3.06 

16 

4.09 

96 

24.56 

30 and over 

965 

68.78 

438 

31.22 

820 

58.46 

155 

11.03 

63 

4.49 

365 

26.02 

Total 

1697 

71.05 

692 

28.95 

1440 

60.27 

247 

10.35 

117 

4.89 

585 

24.49 


The above Table reveals the fact that 692 
out of a total of 2394 rooms, or 28.95 per cent, 
were dark. Of these rooms some were com¬ 
pletely devoid of light and had no windows to 
the outer air, while others had windows open¬ 
ing onto narrow passage ways or shafts. 
These dark rooms provide accommodations 
for 1006 persons. With almost one-third of 
the rooms dark it is needless to comment upon 
the need for more rigid law enforcement, and 
the closing up of a very considerable number 
of these rooms so that they may not be used 
for purposes of housing lodgers. That the 
frequency of dark rooms increases with the 
increase in the size of the establishment is evi¬ 
dent from the above Table, which shows only 
23.82 per cent, dark rooms in establishments 
of less than ten rooms, and 31.22 per cent, 
dark rooms in establishments of more than 30 
rooms, with a gradual increase between these 
two extremes. 

The condition of bad ventilation corre¬ 
sponds in frequency to the frequency of bad 
lighting. Only 1440 rooms out of a total of 
2389 rooms examined for ventilation were 
adequately provided with means of changing 
the air either by some method of artificial ven¬ 
tilation or by means of windows and doors. 
As in the case of lighting, the greatest fre¬ 
quency of the worst provisions for ventilation 


were found in the hotels and rooming houses 
with 30 rooms or more. It must be said, how¬ 
ever, that there were a very considerable num¬ 
ber of small establishments with rooms badly 
ventilated (17.47 per cent). 

The whole problem of lighting and ventila¬ 
tion is intimately related to the fire hazard. 
Dark alleys, air shafts, and dark rooms are 
the true measure of the fire hazard represented 
by the rooming houses and hotels of the City 
of St. Paul. 

We cite below some of the most important 
cases of conditions which represent fire haz¬ 
ard. Sufficient to say that out of a total of 
47 establishments with more than 20 rooms, 
26 were found to present a serious menace to 
occupants in case of fire. Absence of fire es¬ 
capes, locked back yards with narrow ob¬ 
structed front exits, nailed up windows, keys 
that do not work without a great deal of man¬ 
ipulation and effort, halls obstructed by fur¬ 
niture or beer cases, and similar conditions 
were found, and no control seems to have 
been exercised to remove these conditions. 

The difficulties in the way of enforcing leg¬ 
islation through the State Eire Marshal and 
the State Hotel Inspector seems to be mainly 
lack of funds. The law is quite adequate for 
the removal of the most flagrant abuses at 
least. 


63 


Valuation of Properties and Revenues 


In considering the valuations of proper¬ 
ties we were compelled to resort to the only 
source of information available and which is 
perhaps both most reliable and has been made 
on a basis that has some scientific value, 
namely, the Assessor’s Office of St. Paul. 


low. To what extent the valuation recorded 
by the Assessor corresponds with the actual 
values of the property we are not prepared 
to say. Those familiar with local conditions 
are in a better position to furnish such in¬ 
formation. 


On the basis of these figures we were able 
to secure information relative to gross re¬ 
turns in rentals obtained from three classes 
of property, namely: single dwellings, two 
family houses and three or more family 
houses which are ordinarily defined in hous¬ 
ing legislation as tenements. 


That all properties did not yield the same 
rate of revenue is evident when we consider 
one, two and three family houses separately. 
It was found that on this basis the single dwell¬ 
ing yielded a gross return of 6.31 per cent as 
compared with 12.06 per cent for two fam¬ 
ily houses and 11.87 per cent for dwellings 



In order to avoid misinterpretation of fig¬ 
ures, all properties which contained stores and 
where the value of the store could not be 
separated from the rent of the building occu¬ 
pied for residential purposes and also in order 
to avoid confusion due to unlet property, we 
have included in our calculations only such 
properties as were actually and fully occupied 
for residential purposes. 


The total amount of property values con¬ 
sidered was $3,458,533 and the rents from 
these properties should be about $333,829.20, or 
a rate of 9.66 per cent gross. This rate is not 
excessive, if the conditions 
were the same throughout and 
the people were getting prop¬ 
er accommodations. As we 
generally conceive of rental rates 
in the poorer section of Ameri¬ 
can cities, and considering the 
cost of maintenance, the amount 
of repairs that are needed, at 
least sometimes, in order to 
save the property, if not to save 
the health of the occupants, the 
taxes, water rates, etc., would 
seldom leave more than from five 
to six per cent clear, which for 
this type of property is quite 


with three or more families. This rate of 
annual return is especially interesting because 
it shows that the best paying property is not, 
as is ordinarily assumed, the tenement with 
three or more families, but the two family 
house, which is frequently occupied by the 
owner and one tenant or only by tenants. 

While the ideal home is the one family 
building with private yard and with light on 
all sides, the alternative of two family houses 
seems to be satisfactory as an investment and 
is, of course, far superior to the tenement 
which is so undesirable for sanitary as well 


Junk yard surrounded by dwellings. 


64 



Junk dealer’s store and home. 


as social reasons. It is understood, however, 
that from the point of view of the real estate 
owner two-family houses built as a duplex 
are not profitable and do not offer a good 
market. 

That the rate of revenue shown for the 
whole of the area studied does not hold true 
of some of the individual districts is shown 
by the fact that District II, which is classed 
as poor and deteriorated, showed practically 
no difference between the rental rates of 
tenements and two family houses, the former 
yielding an average rental rate of 12.08 per 
cent as compared with 12.28 per cent for the 
latter. District IV, which is fairly good, 
but where the one and two family houses 
are mostly old structures, while the multiple 
dwellings are of more recent construction, 
shows a rental rate of 13.36 per cent for 
tenements and only 7.85 per cent and 9.80 
per cent for one and two family houses re¬ 
spectively. That the tenements being new 
should yield a high rental rate was to be ex¬ 
pected, but as tenements deteriorate more 
rapidly than one and two family houses this 
rate can hardly persist for any considerable 
length of time. 

The other two districts which show a rather 
abnormal distribution of rentals was found in 
Districts X and XVII. In the Tenth District 
the rental rate ranged from 10.64 per cent 


for one family houses to 13.06 
per cent in two family houses, 
and 14.46 in the tenements, 
while in the Seventeenth District 
the rentals ranged from 12.61 
per cent in single dwellings, 
14.36 per cent in two-family 
houses and 15.81 per cent in 
tenements. These districts in 
which the tenements are such 
paying investments were among 
the worst found in the City of 
St. Paul. 

The other districts did not 
deviate materially from the 
general rental rates revealed 
by the figures relating to the entire area con¬ 
sidered in this survey. The tendency toward 
tenement construction, which, as has been 
shown, does not pay on the average as well as 
the two family house, is due in many cities 
to the need for congestion caused by limited 
land areas available for the building of homes. 

Table XXXII shows the distribution of 
land areas by districts according to occupancy. 

Table XXXII. Shozvs the distribution of 
land areas according to districts, according 
to occupancy: 


District 

Unoccupied Per cent 

Occupied 

Per cent 

I 

818,200 

50.05 

816,700 

49.95 

II 

948,450 

27.82 

2,450,625 

72.18 

III 





IV 

665,000 

46.65 

761,950 

53.35 

VIII 

.176,475 

13.67 

1,114,025 

86.33 

IX 

.481,125 

24.61 

1,472,900 

75.39 

X 

1,189,789 

28.58 

2,974,688 

71.42 

XI 

484,592 

19.91 

1,945,653 

80.09 

XII 

257,375 

14.55 

1,512,265 

85.45 

XV 

516,025 

45.78 

612,450 

54.22 

XVI 

215,825 

11.32 

1,690,150 

88.68 

XVII 

905,847 

22.38 

3,157,185 

77.62 

XVIII 

269,825 

43.35 

352,300 

56.65 


6,928,528 

26.85 

18,860,891 

73.15 


With 26.85 per cent of the area studied 
unoccupied the problem of congestion is far 
from becoming^ serious especially if we re¬ 
member that these are the most congested 
residential areas of the City of St. Paul. The 


65 













opportunity for a concrete demonstration of 
the possibilities for the construction of cheap, 
comfortable one or two family houses which 
would stand out as an example of good plan¬ 
ning for the actual needs of the people of a 
given district, is nowhere more imperative 
and favorable than in the very districts in 


which so much squalor, dilapidation, neglect 
and bad management were found. From the 
point of view of its availability, there is no 
land problem in the poorer section of the city, 
although there is a distinct and growing prob¬ 
lem of congestion of buildings, as we shall 
point out later. 


VALUATION OF LAND AND BUILDING. 


It has been shown that 26.85 per cent of the 
land area in the districts we have studied is 
non-productive. When we turn from the 
measurement of the unoccupied area to its 
valuation we find the following: 

Table XXXIII. 


LAND VALUES 


District 

Unoccupied 

Occupied 

Building values 

I 

$442,575.00 

$127,900.00 

. $346,965.00 

II 

133,650.00 

364,325.00 

797,650.00 

IV 

80,200.00 

168,150.00 

259,825.00 

VIII 

96,150.00 

990,800.00 

588,450.00 

IX 

48,850.00 

433,325.00 

726,700.00 

X 

92,500.00 

406,605.00 

1,068,725.00 

XI 


59,510.00 

9,795.00 

XII 

67,155.00 

441,580.00 

878,050.00 

XIV 

34,500.00 

149,225.00 

456,435.00 

XV 

37,375.00 

76,800.00 

258,170.00 

XVI 

31,850.00 

267,275.00 

618,225.00 

XVII 

69,130.00 

426,775.00 

1,138,750.00 

XVIII 

5,350.00 

37,300.00 

36,350.00 

Total 

$739,285.00 

$3,949,570.00 

$7,184,090.00 


These figures show $739,285 
worth of land out of use or 
15.75 per cent, of the total valu¬ 
ation of the area studied for 
which we were able to obtain a 
more or less accurate estimate 
of values. The proportion of 
values of unused lands does not 
correspond to the proportion of 
the unused area. Whether this 
is due to a lower assessment on 
unused land or whether the 
unused areas are less valuable 
we are not competent to judge. 
The assessment of the occu¬ 
pied land averages about 21 


cents a square foot, while the average assess¬ 
ment on unoccupied areas is 16 cents a square 
foot. This low value of properties suggests 
the very pertinent question of facilities for 
parking and playground areas which at this 
time could be obtained by the municipality at 
a very low cost, especially as those districts 
are most in need of more ample and more 
strategically located playground facilities, 
both because of the greater congestion of pop¬ 
ulation and because of the marked differences 
in the character of various unit areas which 
form distinct social and economic strata. 
Table XXXIII presents another rather inter¬ 
esting feature to which attention should be 
called, namely, the relation between assessed 
valuation upon land as compared with the 
buildings or so-called improvements. 



Bakery with barn attached. Filthy surroundings. 


66 





The total valuation of the occupied land is 
$3,949,570, while that of the buildings is 
$7,184,090. In other words, the value of the 
land is 35.45 per cent of the total valuation 
of built up areas. This is greatly out of 
proportion with what is ordinarily recognized 
as a standard of land value in relation to 


houses in areas where strictly tenement prop¬ 
erty, such as we see in New York or Boston, 
has not yet developed. Twenty to twenty- 
five per cent would be sufficient value for the 
density of population and extent of congestion 
of buildings such as we found in most of the 
areas studied. 


LOSS TO THE COMMUNITY DUE TO NON-USE OF PROPERTY. 


The impression conveyed to one examining, 
even superficially, the areas to which this 
housing survey relates, prompts one to refer 
to the waste due both to unoccupied territory, 
and to unoccupancy of buildings with a view 
to interpreting the facts in terms of social 
values. 

In an earlier part of this report the fre¬ 
quency of vacancies and losses of rentals 
through such unoccupancy was referred to. 
The figures compiled in connection with the 
earlier discussion, however, relate to dwel¬ 
lings alone. The following table deals with 
all rentable properties, including stores, pool- 


rooms, etc.: 

Table XXXIV. Shoiving total rentals for 
month received and lost through occupancy, by 


districts: 


RENTALS 



District 

Unoccupied Per cent 

Occupied 

Per cent 

I 

$ 254.00 

$ 13.99 

$ 1 , 562.00 

86.01 

II 

866.50 

15.11 

4 , 869.25 

84.89 

III 

34.75 

23.01 

116.00 

76.99 

IV 

282.75 

15.84 

1 , 497.58 

84.16 

VIII 

522.00 

7.05 

6 , 882.00 

92.95 

IX 

924.00 

16.5 

4 , 679.30 

83.5 

X 

948.00 

20.45 

3 , 679.00 

79.55 

XI 

34.50 

7.8 

407.50 

92.2 

XII 

893.25 

10.82 

7 , 357.00 

89.18 

XIV 

288.00 

10.15 

2 , 573.75 

89.85 

XV 

219.50 

9.59 

2 , 066.75 

90.41 

XVI 



1 , 292.10 

100.00 

XVII 

217.25 

6.37 

3 , 189.80 

93.63 

XVIII 

32.25 

12.1 

234.50 

87.9 

Total 

5 , 516.75 

11.99 

40 , 406.53 

88.01 


A glance at the above table shows that 
$5,516.75 is lost every month because of un- 


occupancy. This means a loss of $66,201.00 
per year in rentals from unoccupied proper¬ 
ties, and in the Third and Tenth Districts the 
loss through failure to rent exceeds one-fifth 
of the total rentals collected in those areas. 
When we add to this loss the unproductive 
values in land, we have a very considerable 



Mushroom caves and manure piles near homes. 


problem which adequate organization of the 
real estate interests, the development of pro¬ 
motive social methods of construction of 
homes, combined with social rent collection 
might, at least partially, obviate. The cost 
of such organization and focusing of effort in 
the direction of making property productive 
would be trifling compared with the losses 
that keep multiplying and increasing with 
every additional year. 


67 






Relation Between Housing and Other Social 

Conditions 



Map showing distribution of cases of dependency dealt with by the United 
Charities of the City of St. Paul in 1916. Prepared by C. C. Stillman. 


It has frequently been shown that the im¬ 
provement of housing conditions is co-exten- 
sive with the improvement of the physical, 
mental and moral conditions of the people 
whose homes have been improved. The effect 
upon the death rates, the morbidity rates, the 
physical development of children, the rate of 


crime, etc., due to the removal of families 
from slum areas into garden city communities 
has been proved beyond a doubt. Within the 
scope of this inquiry it was not feasible to un¬ 
dertake a lengthy inquiry into the relation be¬ 
tween various social factors and housing. We 
were, however, able to study the distribution 
of cases of relief, cases of tuber¬ 
culosis and cases of juvenile de¬ 
linquency in relation to the areas 
studied, and which on the whole 
represent the major portion of 
the most poorly housed families 
in the City of St. Paul. 

The accompanying maps show 
the distribution of cases of relief, 
tuberculosis, and juvenile de¬ 
linquency dealt with by the 
United Charities, the Tubercu¬ 
losis Division of the City Health 
Dept, and the Juvenile Court, re¬ 
spectively. 



Map showing distribution of cases of tuberculosis in 1916 in the 
City of St. Paul. Prepared by Miss Virginia Rice. 


68 



























While the distribution of cases does not cor¬ 
respond exactly with the geographic areas 
studied in the course of this survey, the con¬ 


centration of cases in these areas is such as to 
warrant the conclusion that a close relation¬ 
ship between those factors does exist. 



Map showing juvenile delinquency cases in 1916 in the City of St. Paul. 
Prepared by Dr. A. J. D. Haupt. 


HEALTH AND THE CITY BUDGET. 


Housing is a health problem and the control 
of housing conditions depends, at least in part, 
upon the amount of money available for inspec¬ 
tion and prosecution of cases of insanitation 
found in the community. An examination of 
the budget of the City of St. Paul shows that 
there has been a general increase in appropri¬ 
ation of $279,557.20 in 1917 over 1916, or 
9.77 per cent. On the other hand the increase 
in the appropriation for health work in St. 
Paul for 1917 as compared with 1916 was 
$4,260 or 6.65 per cent or less than the increase 
in the total budget. 


A comparative study of the cost of health 
work per person in the various cities of the 
class of St. Paul shows that while the average 
per capita cost of health work in cities of be¬ 
tween 100,000 and 300,000 population was 31 
cents, the average per capita cost in St. Paul 
was only 25 cents. 

We have cited these figures as indicative of 
the fact that on the whole, the health work of 
the City of St. Paul, which includes housing 
control, is far below the average in financial 
resources for such work, even though the De¬ 
partment of Health may be highly efficient. 


09 


































Achievements to Date 


It was the policy of the Housing Commis¬ 
sion and the Director of this Survey to avoid 
giving unnecessary publicity to the informa¬ 
tion gathered in the course of the investiga¬ 
tion. This was necessary in order to make it 
possible to enter the homes for purposes of 
investigation. There were, however, condi¬ 
tions which seemed so flagrantly dangerous to 
the health of the occupants as to place upon 
the Commission the responsibility for report¬ 
ing the conditions in order to secure action on 
the part of the Health Department of the City. 

In 31 instances definite reports were 
made to the Health Department and in most 
cases satisfactory action was secured. In the 
course of the investigation, owners became 


aware of the dangerous conditions that existed 
in their properties, and improvements of more 
or less extensive character were made. This 
was especially true of the improvement of 
toilet facilities, and the removal of waste that 
was either dangerous as a fire hazard, or as a 
menace to health. In many instances, condi¬ 
tions found to be especially objectionable were 
found to have been removed at the time of a 
second inspection, and this action was taken 
without interference on the part of the Hous¬ 
ing Commission or its representatives. 

At the time of the investigation it became 
apparent that the method of street develop¬ 
ment, particularly in the poorer sections of the 
City, tended toward the monotonous “grid- 



Beaver^Lakf. Heights 

Plan Development 

Carol Arpncvici * u S9T!?i5; 

Aocioumkal Advisor. .•. 


JLake. 


REANE' 


-MINNEHAHA 


70 




































































































































































A cut on page 70 shows a 
general plan of that area as 
laid out by Mr. Bernhard, 
with the co-operation of the 
writer. Whether the homes 
constructed in this area will 
be up to standard from an 
architectural point of view 
will depend entirely upon those who are finan¬ 
cially responsible for the promotion of this 
enterprise. 

It was hoped by the Commission that before 
the completion of the Survey, a Housing As¬ 
sociation would be organized for the purpose 
of building cheap and attractive workmen’s 
homes, and with this object in mind, an option 
upon six acres of land, to be used for the pur¬ 
pose of constructing a number of such homes 
was secured from the owners of the Beaver 
Lake area mentioned above. Through the 
kindness of Mr. Thomas G. Holyoke, an archi¬ 
tect and member of the Housing Commission, 


Proposed grouping of houses on six acre grounds. 

a tentative plan of the development of the six 
acres upon which an option was secured, was 
prepared, and a number of drawings and 
sketches of houses were submitted. 


Small Wage Earner’s Home. 


As an experiment, the 
area located in the proxim¬ 
ity of Beaver Lake was laid 
out under the supervision of 
the Housing Commission, 
with the assistance of Mr. 
Wilhelm Bernhard, of Chi¬ 
cago. This plan, with some 
modifications, was accepted 
by the City, and a number 
of small cottages are already 
being constructed in this 
area. 


iron” system, which is 
wasteful of land and wholly 
unattractive from the es¬ 
thetic point of view. 


71 



























In the preparation of these plans and 
sketches, the needs of a workman’s family 
were considered in relation to the high cost of 
materials that prevails at the present time. 
The average cost of the houses, sketches of 
which are presented in this report on this page 
is between $2,500 and $2,800, on the basis of 
prices prevailing on October 17th, 1917. It 
must be admitted that these houses are above 
the standard generally included in a survey of 
housing conditions such as are dealt with in 
this report, and also, that these houses are 
above standard both from an esthetic and from 
a practical point of view and compare very 
favorably in cost with houses that would com¬ 
mand small investments and which are highly 
unattractive and ill adjusted to the American 
homes of the wage earning class. 


H0P03C.D qtoop or hooolo at 

RAVES.' LAK.E J1UG/1T3 



Bun G,Ai-owTrpn 

Studies of room arrangement for wage earners’ homes. 




CAIODL-AISOKOYICI-OOCIOIOGICALADVIMK 




Study E> 


PJtOIOSH) • G'EDOP-OT- HOOBE5- AT-&IAVEK.-L MX- HeACJUS 
.st.paoi^- Mink* 

ertfonroiLs..Ancnt- jemm*W fcAvjs Asso-cutfc* 

eA*4»U*AxoH©vtci- socioi4DOicAisA{>Yteoiv Acj I9v7 


Study of room arrangement for wage earners’ homes. 


Study of room arrangement for wage earner’s home. 


72 




























































































































It is to be regretted that housing reform is 
ordinarily confined to slum areas, and does not 
contemplate as a rule, the improvement of the 
standard of attractive homes for all of the 
people. It must be admitted, nevertheless, that 
improvement in the housing conditions of one 
class of wage earners, however highly skilled 


they may be, if it does not involve an increase 
in the cost of such homes, is bound to have a 
beneficial effect upon the community as a 
whole. It is for this reason that the plans pre¬ 
pared by Mr. Holyoke are included in this 
report. 



Study of possible housing scheme in outlying district of St. Paul. 


73 





Conclusions 


The recommendations published else¬ 
where in this report embody constructive 
suggestions for the improvement of condi¬ 
tions based upon first-hand evidence. Some 
of the evidence, however, while of impor¬ 
tance in gauging the seriousness and char¬ 
acter of the problem has no particular bear¬ 
ing upon the methods of improvement, ex¬ 
cept as a means of shaping public opinion in 
favor of housing reform. Some of the gen¬ 
eral conclusions which suggest themselves 
from an examination of the facts are as fol¬ 
lows: 

1. The legislation bearing on the control 
of housing conditions in St. Paul is inade¬ 
quate. 

2. The Health Department is unable to 
enforce existing laws for reasons of shortage 
of appropriation and inadequate inspection 
force. 

3. Structural defects of new buildings and 
the low standard of construction prevalent 
in the earlier days of the development of St. 
Paul are more largely responsible for bad 
housing than the habits and standards of life 
of the people. 

4. More than one-third of the population 
whose homes were studied belong to the 
classes generally designated either as Amer¬ 
ican or of nationalities with high standards 
of living. 

5. In districts examined, home ownership 
is more prevalent among the Jews, Italians, 
Germans and Scandinavians than among 
the Americans. 

6. There is no serious problem of room 
congestion in the homes of the City of St. 
Paul, at least, in the districts examined. A 
few cases of excessive crowding were found. 


but they were by no means typical of the 
general condition. 

7. Single dwellings were in poor repair in 
greater proportion than the multiple dwell¬ 
ings. This is due to the greater proportion 
of single dwellings of old construction. 

8. In the sections examined there is no 
shortage of dwellings. There is, however, 
throughout the City a shortage of homes of 
high grade adapted to the needs of wage 
earning families. 

9. There is a superabundance of toilets, 
the use of which is shared by from two to 
ten families with the result that a dispropor¬ 
tionate amount of irresponsible use, disre¬ 
pair and general neglect were found. 

10. The lodger evil which is so intensely 
difficult to control in eastern cities is very 
much less acute in St. Paul. There is, how¬ 
ever, a most serious problem of housing the 
single men and single women, which is cou¬ 
pled with the difficulties to control the room¬ 
ing houses and hotels of the City. The lat¬ 
ter involves a moral as well as a health prob¬ 
lem. 

11. From the statistical data we were able 
to gather, it would seem that the two fam¬ 
ily house represents a better investment 
from the point of view of revenue-yielding 
power than either the single dwelling or the 
tenement or multiple dwelling. 

12. Almost sixteen per cent, of the land 
area in the sections studied is unoccupied. 
The assessments show low values which 
suggest the desirability of securing open 
spaces for much needed park and play¬ 
ground purposes. 

13. The poor arrangement of the lots, 
the unscientific placement of buildings, the 


74 


uncontrolled heights of buildings and ab¬ 
sence of regulation regarding distances be¬ 
tween walls, have caused a disproportionate 
amount of bad lighting and ventilation and 
many dark rooms, characteristic of the older 
slum areas of the City of New York. 


14. The failure to provide a city-wide zon¬ 
ing system has done considerable damage to 
valuable property which might otherwise 
have been protected. The present zoning 
system is hardly adequate to meet the needs 
of the City of St. Paul. 



75 






Recommendations 

HOUSING CODE. 


The experience derived from the present 
investigation and a comparative study of 
the housing legislation affecting building 
enterprise in the City of St. Paul and in other 
cities of similar size and character shows 
conclusively that additional legislation is 
needed to meet the local situation. 

Builders and other persons financially in¬ 
terested in the business of contracting and 
maintaining dwellings of various types have 
done a great deal toward assuming certain 
standards of construction which would safe¬ 
guard structures against collapse or other 
destruction due to poor methods of construc¬ 
tion. The fear of criminal prosecution has 
removed this aspect of housing legislation 
from the field of reform into the realm of 
self protective methods in the interest of 
builders and owners. It is the neglect of 
the essential necessities of health, privacy 
and comfort that most requires the atten¬ 
tion of the housing reformer and housing 
legislation. All dangers from violent injury 
and death being removed in most instances, 
there still remains a vast field of legislation 
and control that deals with those aspects of 
the housing problem that relate to the pro¬ 
tection of tenants and owners occupying 
their own homes against the almost imper¬ 
ceptible, but positive, wasting of health. 
While the increase in the death rates cannot 
always easily be traced to bad housing, 
there is overwhelming statistical evidence of 
the close relationship between these two 
factors. 


That crime and immorality and depen¬ 
dency are coupled with bad housing has 
been shown by the maps published in this 
report and which correspond closely to the 
worst areas studied in the course of this in¬ 
quiry. 

A comprehensive city ordinance is append¬ 
ed to this report in the hope that the City 
which has ample power to do so will adopt 
it in full as the first means of providing ade¬ 
quate housing legislation for this City. 

Certain changes in the present adminis¬ 
tration of housing legislation are made with 
a view to increasing efficiency at a limited 
cost to the City. Eventually it is to be hoped 
that a State-wide code will be passed by 
the State Legislature so that uniform con¬ 
trol may be exercised throughout the State, 
and through its instrumentality a State De¬ 
partment of Housing established, such as is 
in vogue in New Jersey and has been sug¬ 
gested for the State of Pennsylvania. For 
the time being, however, there is immediate 
need of action, and local legislation is within 
the reach of the community, thanks to its 
present charter which gives to the munici¬ 
pality a considerable amount of home rule. 

It is to be hoped that the passage of a 
local ordinance will carry with it sufficient 
appropriation to meet the needs for adequate 
enforcement. 


HOUSING BUREAU. 


Owing to the difficulties encountered in 
securing low rent dwellings, the various local 
agencies are frequently confronted with a 
situation where they actually assist in the 
payment of rentals in buildings which are 
below all standards of sanitation. That 


there are vacancies of houses which are su¬ 
perior to many of those at present occupied 
was evident from the facts we have been 
able to gather in the course of this inquiry. 
How to keep account of families that need 
removal from their present environment and 


76 


secure better accommodations for them is 
a problem that has not been met so far be¬ 
cause of inadequate organization or absence 
of proper machinery. 

A Housing Bureau attached to one ot the 
existing organizations which would be de¬ 
voted to the work of removing families to 
better houses and improved surroundings, 
and which at the same time would keep in 
constant touch with social agencies regard¬ 
ing the sanitary condition of the homes of 
their beneficiaries, would be of enormous ad¬ 
vantage to the families living under subnor¬ 
mal conditions of housing. Such a Bureau 
could also act as a means of checking up 
the work of health inspectors, building and 
plumbing inspectors and other officials en¬ 
trusted with the protection of the sanitation 
and safety of the homes of the people. 

The St. Paul Association, the United 
Charities, the Wilder Charity or all of these 
could become directly responsible for such 
a Bureau. Its cost in a City like St. Paul 
would be trifling compared with the service 
rendered and the continuity that could be 

SOCALIZATION OF 

The experience of that very remarkable 
pioneer in housing reform, Miss Octavia 
Hill, and the service rendered by the Asso¬ 
ciation bearing- Miss Hill’s name which has 
worked for over a score of years in Philadel¬ 
phia, show that there is much to be gained 
from both the economic and social point of 
view by a systematic organization of friend¬ 
ly rent collecting. In the field of industry 
and commerce the socializing of the relation¬ 
ship between employer and employee, 
through welfare departments and other so¬ 
cial service, has fostered a more intimate 
relationship between the two classes of peo¬ 
ple and has promoted efficiency. The meth¬ 
ods which in the field of industry and com¬ 
merce have tended to produce efficiency of 
service, may to the same extent promote 
better relationships between owners and ten¬ 
ants with economic results that would re¬ 
duce losses through unoccupancy and fail- 


given to housing reforms through this me¬ 
dium. 

In view of the experience of other cities 
where housing surveys have merely resulted 
in temporary agitation, with a few palliative 
improvements, but without the development 
of constructive, progressive programs, one is 
prompted to assign a great deal more im¬ 
portance to a Housing Bureau than is sug¬ 
gested in the above discussion. Many cities 
have felt the need for separate permanent 
organization with budgets ranging from 
$2,000 to $15,000 per year which are devoted 
entirely to the interests of housing reform. 
Whether there is need for an independent 
organization of this magnitude in St. Paul 
we are not prepared to say. This will be 
determined wholly by the effectiveness of 
the work of the existing organizations and 
the willingness of the City government to 
heed the needs that have been made appar¬ 
ent through this report, and to act promptly 
and with the breadth of vision that the im¬ 
portance and magnitude of the local prob¬ 
lems demand. 

RENT COLLECTING. 

ure to pay rent, while at the same time a 
reduction in the cost of maintenance due to 
careless use or abuse of property could be 
brought about. 

This effort need not take the form of a 
philanthropy or semi-philanthropy plus 4 
per cent. It could be organized by individ¬ 
ual real estate dealers and agents on a co¬ 
operative basis, with a social service worker 
in charge of the collection of rents, the rent¬ 
ing of unlet houses, the supervision of san¬ 
itary conditions, the control of the use of the 
facilities available, the making of necessary 
repairs, the promotion of garden work, etc., 
without in any way placing the service on 
the plane of charity work. In other words, 
the socializing of the business of rent col¬ 
lection could be brought about with as much 
benefit to the business of renting and the 
collection of rents as to the tenants them¬ 
selves. 


77 


The large sums of money lost through 
failure to rent, the losses of from three to 
five per cent due to non-collection of rents, 
which so often occurs and the repairs neces¬ 
sary or required due to abuse of property 
could be reduced to a minimum at an almost 
insignificant cost. 

It is suggested that this experiment in 
“Socialized Rent Collecting” be tried in some 
section of the City of St. Paul by engaging 


the services of a person experienced in this 
field, and familiar with real estate problems. 
The sum of $1,500.00 should be sufficient to 
test this method of handling real estate, es¬ 
pecially in areas where much deterioration 
exists and loss through non-occupancy is 
considerable. In determining upon such a 
district where this experiment should be 
tried, the advice of the State Real Estate 
Board should be taken into account. 


HOTELS AND LODGING HOUSES. 


The hotels and lodging houses present a 
serious menace to the health, safety and 
morality of the community. The police 
powers of the City are adequate for the re¬ 
moval of the moral dangers, if only the De¬ 
partment in charge of the enforcement of 
the laws would exercise sufficient vigilance 
and take action where action is warranted. 
The courts should, of course, be induced to 
face the dangers that the numerous hotels 
present, and co-operate with the Police De¬ 
partment in stamping out the evils. 

The control of the safety and sanitation 
of these hotels is in the hands of the State 
Hotel Inspector. This official has an appro¬ 
priation of $6,000.00 per year, which is by 
$2,500.00 less than the income derived from 
the licensing of hotels and lodging houses. 
It is admitted that the present facilities for 
the inspection of the numerous hotels and 
lodging houses in the State is wholly inade¬ 
quate, and that in most instances permits to 
operate are granted without any knowledge 
on the part of the State Hotel Inspector as 
to the fitness of the buildings operated as 
lodging houses and hotels. This condition 
has naturally led to laxness on the part of 
the managers and owners with such results 
as we have pointed out in the body of this 
report. 


It is suggested that the Hotel Inspector 
make, with the assistance of the local Health 
Department and State Fire Marshal, a com¬ 
plete study of every hotel or licensed lodg¬ 
ing house in the City of St. Paul and 
throughout the State if possible, so that at 
the end of the year when license renewals 
are applied for, the office of the State Hotel 
Inspector would have accurate and complete 
information regarding every establishment 
in the City and State which could be used in 
determining upon the right of owners and 
managers to operate under the existing laws. 

In view of the fact that the present appro¬ 
priation of the State Hotel Inspector is in¬ 
adequate to meet the needs of the State, it 
is suggested that the City of St. Paul ar¬ 
range through its Health Department to co¬ 
operate in the securing of an adequate sys¬ 
tem of inspection and the enforcement of 
both State Laws and City Ordinances, 
through the instrumentality of one inspec¬ 
tor with whom both State and Municipal 
authority would be vested. Such a plan 
would avoid duplication of effort and facili¬ 
tate law enforcement. 

Another suggestion that occurs to any 
one familiar with the local lodging house 
and hotel situation, is the need for the con¬ 
struction of a cheap, sanitary hotel located 


73 


preferably in the Midway district, where a 
considerable share of the transient labor 
congregates. Such a hotel should be pro¬ 
vided with adequate facilities for recreation, 
restaurant or boarding facilities at low cost, 
and should be under the management of a 
corporation or committee made up of citi¬ 
zens interested in maintaining an adequate 
labor supply, and who are actually employ¬ 
ers of labor. Some member of the State 
Board of Health or its Secretary should be 
a member ex officio of the managing body. 

The Bethel Hotel which is now being con¬ 
ducted as a semi philanthropic establish¬ 


ment and has proved a paying enterprise, 
should undertake this larger enterprise in 
preference to continuing the operation of 
the present establishment which is in every 
way below standard and should be consid¬ 
ered under no circumstances as a philan¬ 
thropic institution as it is a menace to the 
health and safety of the occupants. The 
Bethel Hotel should be closed at once and 
the managing Board should launch a move¬ 
ment for the building of an up to date work¬ 
ingmen’s hotel. 


THE REAL ESTATE BOARD. 


In our efforts to secure data concerning 
the rate of deterioration of buildings of 
various types and the cost of maintenance, 
we found that no such information was 
available. The records of the real estate 
agents, while accurate in many ways are of 
no use for research purposes. It is sug¬ 
gested that the Real Estate Board of St. 
Paul undertake an extensive study of con¬ 
struction, maintenance and depreciation 
costs of single, two family and tenement 
house buildings in the City of St. Paul with 
a view to securing accurate information as 
to the paying powers of the various types 
of dwellings over a period of years. Such 
information may prove of social value to 
the community and of economic value to 
the real estate interests of the City. 

In a bulletin recently issued by the Hous¬ 
ing Committee of the National Association 
of Real Estate Boards, under the Chairman¬ 
ship of Mr. Fred S. Smith of Minneapolis, 
the following statement is made in partial 
answer to the question as to the reason why 


Real Estate Boards should promote housing 
legislation: 

“BECAUSE, for the protection of real 
estate interests, you must investigate and 
study local conditions and sincerely aid in 
the correction of existing evils and prevent 
their repetition in new buildings. 

BECAUSE, if you leave this work to other 
civic organizations and individuals entirely, 
the penalty of your neglect is likely to mean 
drastic and possibly impractical laws or or¬ 
dinances.” 

This attitude reflects credit on the nation¬ 
al organization and points the way toward a 
new professional standard in real estate bus¬ 
iness which should prove valuable to the 
communities. The suggestion regarding 
the need for scientific study of housing 
problems in the light of their economic 
and social aspects is made in the hope 
that new facts may be brought to light 
which would remove housing reform from 
the field of superficial and sentimental spec¬ 
ulation into the field of scientific legislation 
and law enforcement. 


TOWN PLANS AND ZONING COMMISSION. 


The City of St. Paul is protected by a zon¬ 
ing ordinance which is wholly inadequate to 
meet the needs of the city. The fact that 
the enforcement of the ordinance depends 


upon a limited number of property owners 
is bound to produce conditions wholly out of 
keeping with the needs of the City, and 
must in the end fail to protect in the aggre- 


79 


gate the normal and economic development 
of building enterprises, particularly in the 
residential areas of St. Paul. 

Such sections as the Lower and Upper 
Levees, the Phalen Creek district, and the 
more recently developed areas of the com¬ 
munity, need careful and painstaking con¬ 
sideration on the part of an expert body of 
engineers, townplanners, and business men, 
in order to provide the city with a careful 
plan for its future growth, which would di¬ 


rect the development of the city in the fu¬ 
ture along the most modern lines, both as an 
industrial and as a residential center. 

Such a Commission should be created by 
ordinances of City Council, with an appro¬ 
priation of not less than $20,000 to be ex¬ 
pended during a period of two years, the 
amount to cover the development of an ade¬ 
quate zoning system, an adequate city plan, 
and a careful development of standards of 
heights of buildings. 


.1 



Conditions surrounding public school. 


30 



Analysis of 

Laws in Cities and States Throughout 
the Country. 

T HE following analyses of laws in cities and states are presented 
in comparative form for the purpose of furnishing a basis 
upon which to meet the deficiencies of the laws and ordinances 
affecting the housing of the City of St. Paul. This analysis lays no 
claim of completeness, as it would have been wholly impracticable 
to give the full text of the law in every case, with the modifying 
clauses and amendments that have been made from time to time. 
Wherever the “Model Law” is referred to it should be taken to mean 
the bill presented to the Pennsylvania Legislature in 1917 by the 
Building Code Commission of that state. 

Wherever possible, we have compiled the abstracts from most re¬ 
cent printed forms available on the 1st of July, 1917. Abbreviations 
of legal provisions and summaries have been frequently necessary, 
and for this reason the possibility for misinterpretation of specific 
provisions has not been entirely obviated. Despite all these shortcom¬ 
ings, the writer feels that this synoptic analysis affords the reader 
means of identification of various laws and ordinances which should 
prove helpful to the reader interested in providing adequate legisla¬ 
tion for the City of St. Paul. 


81 

































•• 









































































































Analysis of Housing Laws and Ordinances Affecting Various Cities and States. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Building' Code adopted July 6, 1908, with 
amendments to April 1, 1914. 

Boston, Mass. 

The Building Law of the city of Boston, 
Acts of 1907 as amended to 1916. 


Bridgeport, 

Building Code 1915. 


Conn. 


Calgary, Can. 

Building Ordinances, Oct. 1912, with 
amendments to May 1, 1914. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

1917 ilding Ordinance. Proposed Revision 

Chicag-o, Ill. 

Building Ordinances, Sanitary Code, April 
1, 1913, with amendments to April 1, 1914. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Building Code as passed May 1, 1909, and 
as amended to January 1, 1917. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Housing Code, 1'917. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Building Code December 27, 1916. 


Denver, Colo. 

Revised Building Ordinance, 1916. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Rules and Regulations for control of build¬ 
ing, occupancy and maintenance of dwellings 
as adopted by Board of Health in 1916 and 
amended in 1917. 


Duluth, Minn. 

Housing Ordinance, April, 1914. 


LAWS REGULATING TENEMENT HOUSES 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Building Code passed Nov. 17, 1913 and 
amended to 1916. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Building Ordinances, 1913, with amend¬ 
ments to May 1, 1914. 

State Law of the Tenement for 1st class 
cities, March, 1912. 

Lowell, Mass. 

Building Ordinance, 1906. 

Mein,phis, Tenn. 

Building Code, Dec. 17, 1912. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

Building Code, 1914. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Housing Act June 1, 1917. 

New Orleans, I,a. 

Building Code, as passed May 14, 1914, and 
amended to March 18, 1915. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Building Code, as passed May 14, 1915, and 
amended to March 18, 1915. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Building Code 1913. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Proposed act governing the construction, 
erection, enlargement, alteration, repairing, 
maintenance and safe guarding of buildings 
and the proper safe guarding of the health 
and lives of persons using such buildings. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Manual of Building Inspection, 1909. State 
Law of Tenement for 1903. State Law for 


Plumbing and Sanitation, 1911, with amend¬ 
ments to April, 1914; also certain local 
ordinances. 

Portland, Ore. 

Building Code Revised to June, 1915. 

Providence, R. I. 

Building Laws, Traffic, Plumbing, etc.. 
Ordinances, State Law. April, 1909, with 
amendments to April, 1914. 

Richmond, Va. 

Building Code, 1908, and as amended to 
1916. 

Rochester, N. Y. 


St. Paul, Minn. 

Building Code, July, 1913, with amend¬ 
ments to April, 1914. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Building Ordinance, April, 1910, with 
amendments to April, 1914. 

Toledo, Ohio 

General Ordinance 1905 with amendments 
to Peb. 1914. 

Toronto, Can. 

By-laws for regulating the erection and 
safety of buildings, April, 1913, with amend¬ 
ments to May 1, 1914. 

Washington. D. C. 

Building Regulations Peb. 1913. Plumbing 
Code Aug. 1913. Act of Congress approved 
March 19, 1906, and June 1, 1910, with Amend¬ 
ments to April, 1914. 

Worcester, Mass. 

Building and Plumbing Ordinances 1917. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Bldg, occupied by more than 3 families 
living independently and doing cooking on 
premises or by more than 2 families on floor 
so living and cooking. 

Boston, Mass. 

A tenement house is a building or any 
portion thereof occupied as a dwelling by 
more than 3 families living independently 
of each other and doing their cooking on 
the premises, or by more than 2 families 
living above the first story, so living and 
cooking. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Same as Model Law. 

Calgary, Can. 

An “Apt.” house is any 'bldg, with sep¬ 
arate housekeeping apts. for 3 or more fam¬ 
ilies or for 2 or more families over story 
otherwise occupied. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Dwellings occupied by more than 2 families 
doing their cooking on the premises. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Any house or building or portion used as a 
home or residence or 2 or more families liv¬ 
ing in separate apartments. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Same as Model Law. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Building occupied by 2 or more families. 
Otherwise same as Model Law. 

Dayton, Ohio 

All buildings occupied by two or more 
families. Otherwise same as Model Daw. 

Denver, Colo. 

Any building occupied by 3 or more fam¬ 
ilies as a dwelling, living independently of 
each other and doing their cooking on the 
premises. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Building occupied by 3 or more families (or 
by 2 families when portion of building is used 


DEFINITION OF TENEMENT HOUSE 

for business purposes) living independently 
and having common rights and halls, etc. 

Duluth, Minn. 

Building occupied by more than 2 families 
living independently but having common 
right in halls, etc., and doing cooking on 
premises. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Any building occupied by 2 or more famil¬ 
ies. Otherwise same as Model Law. 

Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 

Same as Model Law. 

Menr,pbis, Tenn. 

Same as Model Law. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

Same as Model Law. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

A building occupied by several families 
in which rooms are occupied in apartments, 
suites or groups. 

New Orleans, La. 

Building occupied by more than 3 families 
living independently doing their cooking on 
premises or by 2 families so living above 1st 
story. 

Omaha, Neb. 

A building used as a home for 2 or more 
families living in separate apartments. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Same as Model Law. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Any building or part of building occupied 
as a home by 3 or more families living in¬ 
dependently of each other in separate apart¬ 
ments, doing their own cooking on the prem¬ 
ises and having a common right in stair¬ 
ways, halls, courts and yards. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Building occupied by 3 or more families 
living in separate apartments and doing 
their cooking on premises. 


Portland, Ore. 

All buildings containing suites or apart¬ 
ments used for permanent habitation by 
two or more families. 

Providence, R. I. 

Building occupied by more than 3 families 
living independently and doing their cooking 
on premises or by more than 2 families on 
floor with common rights to halls, etc. 

Richmond, Va. 

Any building used as a home by more than 
three families. 

Rochester, N, Y. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Bldg, occupied by 3 or more families liv¬ 
ing independently and doing cooking upon 
premises, or by more than 2 families on any 
floor so living and cooking and having com¬ 
mon rights, halls, etc. 

Seattle. Wash. 

Bldg, occupied by 2 or more families liv¬ 
ing independently and doing cooking on 
premises, each having own water closet and 
having common rights in halls, etc. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Bldg, occupied by more than one family 
on a floor living independently and doing 
their cooking on the premises. 

Toronto, Can. 

Any bldg, which has 3 or more suites or 
sets of rooms for separate occupation by 
one or more persons. 

'Washington, D. C. 

Bldg, used by more than 2 families living 
separately and doing their cooking on the 
premises. 

Worcester, Mass. 

An apartment house is one containing 3 
or more apartments. No definition of tene¬ 
ment given. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Tenement more than 5 stories or 70 ft. in 
height shall be fire proof. 1st story of non¬ 
fire proof tenement 3 stories high must be 
fire proof. 

Boston, Mass. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

All buildings over 4 stories high or 3 
stories and basement or over 55 ft. high 
must be fire proof. 

Calgary, Can. 

Tenement more than 3 stories in height 
must be fire proof. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Chicago, It?. 

Tenement more than 5 stories and base¬ 
ment shall be fire proof; tenement of 4 or 5 
stories shall be of slow burning material 
and cellar and 1st floor fire proof. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Tenements more than 5 stories and an at¬ 
tic high must be fire proof. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Required when over three stories high. 

*The lines under names of cities denote 
absence of regulation. 


FIRE PROVISIONS—Fire proof tenements 
Dayton, Ohio 

All hotels and tenements 5 stories or more 
in height or with topmost floor 50 ft. above 
average grade, shall be of fire proof con¬ 
struction. 

* Denver, Colo. 


Detroit, Mich. 

Buildings over 8 stories or 100 ft. shall be 
fire proof. 

Duluth, Minn. 

Tenement or dwelling over 3 stories high, 
must be fire proof. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 


Louisville, Ky. 

All tenements of three stories and a base¬ 
ment in height must be of fire proof material. 

Lowell, Mass. 


Mem.phis, Tenn. 

All dwellings over three stories and base¬ 
ment must be fire proof. 

Milwaukee, W 7 is. 

All apts., tenement and lodging houses 5 
stories or more above the basement shall be 
fire proof. In non-fire proof tenements over 


3 stories, 1st floor shall be of fire proof con¬ 
struction. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

All dwellings three stories and over must 
be fire proof. 


New Orleans, La. 

Tenement of 59 ft. in height must be fire 
proof. 


Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 

Those exceeding five stories in height shall 
be fire proof. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Tenements, dwellings, hotels and lodging 
houses, 3 stories or more in height shall be 
of fire resistive construction. Such build¬ 
ings not more than 2 stories in height may 
be of mill construction or ordinary construc¬ 
tion. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Four stories or more must be fire proof. 

Portland, Ore. 

Any tenement more than 70 feet in height 
but not over 120 ft. must be of fire proof 
construction. 


83 




















FIRE PROVISIONS—Fire proof tenements —Cont’d 


Providence, R. I. 

Tenements more than 4 stories high in the 
1st or business district or more than 65 ft. 
high in 2d district must be fire proof. 


Rielimoud, Vn. 


Rochester, N. V. 


St. Paul, Minn. 

Tenement more than 3 stories high shall be 
fire proof. When any such 'bldg, exceeds 100 
ft. in height it shall not be less than 40 ft. 
wide. 


Seattle, Wash. 

No fire proof tenement shall exceed in 
height the width of the widest adjoining 
street plus 25 ft. and in no case 125 ft. 


Toledo, Ohio 

All bldgs. 100 ft. or more in height must 
be fire proof. 

Toronto, Can. 

Tenement over 35 ft. in height shall be fire 
proof. 

Washington, D. C. 

Bldgs, over 4 stories or more than 55 ft. 
high must be fire proof.* 

Worcester. Mass. 


Baltimore, Md. 

No wooden tenement shall be made for 
occupancy by more than 6 families. 

Boston, Mass. 

May be erected outside the building limits 
if not more than 3 stories in height above 
the basement, nor over 1800 sq. ft. in area. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Prohibited in fire limits. When built in 
rows they must be separated by fire stops. 

Calgary, Can. 

Prohibited. Cannot be converted into 
tenements if they exceed 2 stories in height 
exclusive of basement or 36 ft. in height, or 
be wider than 30 ft. or wider than 60 ft. un¬ 
less interior be subdivided by fire proof 
walls to that size. Private Bldgs, shall not 
be more than 36 ft. high. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Forbidden inside fire limits. Outside of 
fire limits wooden tenements shall not ex¬ 
ceed 45 ft. in height and above 2nd story it 
must not be occupied as a separate living 
apartment. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Prohibited in fire limits. If constructed in 
a row the division walls of different houses 
must be constructed of incombustible ma¬ 
terial. 

Columhus, Ohio 

No wooden tenement exceeding 2 stories 
in height shall be erected. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Hotels and tenements of not more than 2 
stories may be of frame construction, but 
no hotel to be placed within 10 ft. and no 
tenement within 5 ft. of other buildings on 
lot line. No such building shall be erected 
within the fire limits, except stone. 

Denver, Colo. 

Prohibited in inner fire district if 80 ft. or 
more in height. In middle fire district all 
bldgs, must be semi-fire proof. 


fire PROVISIONS—Wooden tenements 
Detroit, Mich. 

Wooden tenement or dwelling shall not ex¬ 
ceed 30 ft. in height. 

Duluth, Minn. 

No wooden tenements shall be over 2 stories 
high. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 


Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Menr.phis, Tenn. 

Prohibited in inner fire limits. Shall not 
be nearer than 4 ft. to any other bldg. Rows 
of such bldgs, must be separated by walls 
of fire proof material. 

Alilwaukee, Wis. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Shall not be placed on same lot with mul¬ 
tiple dwellings within fire limits. Wooden 
bldgs, shall not be built in row, not closer 
than 7 ft. to other bldg, to side lot line if 3 
stories, 2 ft. added for every additional story. 

New Orleans, La. 

Outside the fire limits no wooden tenements 
shall exceed 2 stories in height above base¬ 
ment nor 4000 sq. ft. floor area. 

Omaha, Neb. 

May be built outside the fire limits when 
not more than 2 stories high. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Prohibited in fire limits. Shall not exceed 
3 stories in height. Erection of 3 story 
frame double deckers is prohibited. Spaces 
betw. stud and joists shall be filled with in¬ 
combustible material. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Tenements may be of frame construction 
when not more than one story in height. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 

Frame tenements shall not exceed 100 ft. 
in any direction, unless a wall of brick or 
terra cotta reduces the dimensions. 

Providence, R. I. 

Wooden tenements shall not exceed 35 ft. 
in height. 

Richmond, Vn. 

Prohibited in fire limits. Those outside fire 
limits shall not bo over 2 stories high. 
Ground areas of such bldgs, shall be 7500 sq. 
ft. for 1 story and 5,000 sq. ft. for 2 story 
bldgs. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Construction of wooden tenements or con¬ 
version of other frame buildings into tene¬ 
ments prohibited in the fire districts. Ad¬ 
ditions of 70 square feet may be made for 
bathroom or water closets. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Wooden tenements shall not be over 2 
stories in height. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Wooden tenements shall not exceed an 
average of 3 stories or 30 ft. in height, not 
4 stories or 40 ft. in any part. 

Toledo. Ohio 

Wooden tenements shall not be more than 
45 ft. in height nor be inside the fire limits. 

Toronto, Can. 


AVashington, D. C. 

Tnmts. shall not be more than 3 stories or 
4 0 ft. in height. Prohibited within fire lim¬ 
its. Tnmts. 3 stories high must be of fire 
proof construction up to and including 1st 
floor. 

AVorcester. Mass. 

Prohibited in fire district Those built 
contiguous shall be separated by a division 
wall built of brick, terra cotta or concrete. 
Must extend from front to rear from base¬ 
ment to roof. 

Only 2 apartments on floor. 


FIRE PROA'ISIONS—Fire escapes, requirements for and details of construction 


Baltimore, Md. 

Every tenement over 2 stories must have 
one or more fire escapes. Every one 3 stor¬ 
ies with 2 or more apts. on a floor must have 
fire escape for each vertical series of apts. 
General requirements for construction fixed 
in building ordinance. 

Boston, Mass. 

All tenement houses more than 3 stories 
high shall have 1 of the following means 
of egress beside front and rear stairs: 1. 
Enclosed stairway of iron or concrete, ex¬ 
tending from roof to ground. 2. Iron bal¬ 
conies connecting with adjoining buildings. 
3. Exterior escapes of iron, carrying 70 lbs. 
to sq. foot. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Metal fire escapes required for assembly 
halls. 

Calgary, Can. 

Bldgs, of 3 stories or more must have suf¬ 
ficient fire escapes as required by Supt. of 
Bldgs. Details of construction partially 
specified and left to Supt. of Bldgs. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Metal or reinforced fire escapes shall be 
considered equivalent to 1 of the required 
exits for all buildings not more than 3 stories 
high. It may project over public way. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Every tenement 4 or more stories must have 
fire escape accessible for each apartment. 
Details of construction is required by State 
Statute and City Ordinance. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Tenements of 3 or more stories in height 
must have access to fire escape and stairway 
without passing thru another apartment. 
Fire escapes must be made of iron or steel 
and their location approved by Commis¬ 
sioner of Buildings. Inspection of fire es¬ 
capes shall be made once a year. 

Columhus, Ohio 

Non-fire proof tenement houses 3 stories 
or more unless provided with 2 independent 
flights of stairs accessible from each apt. 
shall have an additional fire proof stairway 
or a fire escape, constructed of iron or stone. 

Dayton, Ohio 

One means of egress shall be the means of 
ingress, the other be an inside fire proof 
stairs. An outside landing with stairs de¬ 
scending from roof to grade, or a standard 
fire escape. 


Denver, Colo. 

To be provided in all two story bldgs, in¬ 
habited by more than one family. Shall 
consist of iron balconies connected by iron 
stairs. No., size and location to be deter¬ 
mined by Bldg. Inspector. Not more than 50 
persons to use any one fire escape. 

Detroit, Mieh. 

For tenement over 2 stories high there must 
be 1 fire escape from 2nd floor to roof. If 
building is occupied by more than 300 above 
1st floor, 2 fire escapes; by 600 3 fire escapes, 
by 900 as required by Department of Build¬ 
ing^. Details of construction specified in 
Building Code. 

Duluth, Minn. 

Every tenement must have sufficient means 
of egress in case of fire. Must be approved 
by Building Department. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 


Louisville, Ky. 

All tenements of 2 stories and a basement 
in height or over, shall be equipped with such 
fire escapes as shall be deemed adequate by 
the building department. 

Lowell, Mass. 

Required on public buildings. 

Mem.phis, Tenn. 

Any room in any apt. not fronting on 
street or yard shall have fire escape in court 
projecting not more than 4 ft. from the 
house. Each apt. above 1st story shall open 
on fire escape from at least one room. 

Milwaukee, AAYs. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Shall be located at each story; shall con¬ 
sist of iron, stone or concrete balconies and 
stairs; shall be placed at an angle of not 
greater than 45 degrees. 

New Orleans, La. 

Every tenement more than 3 stories in 
height must have sufficient means of egress 
in case of fire. Must be approved by City 
Engineer. 

Omaha, Neh. 

Every tenement of 3 or more stories must 
be provided with fire escape. Every apt. 
must have direct access to at least one fire 
escape unless it has access to 2 flights of 
stairs. Shall be built of incombustible ma¬ 
terials. 


Paterson, N. J. 

Balconies and stairs shall be of steel. Bal¬ 
conies shall be not more than 1 ft. below 
window sill. Shall descend at an angle of 
60 degrees. 

Pennsylvania (Alodel Law). 

Non-fire proof buildings more than 3 stor¬ 
ies high shall be provided with at least one 
fire escape or tower escape leading to every 
story with a stairway or gooseneck ladder 
to roof. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Tenements 3 or more stories high shall 
have permanent safe external means of es¬ 
cape, number and location of such escapes to 
be governed by size of building and number 
of inmates. Buildings with over 100 persons 
shall have 2 such stairways. Details of con¬ 
struction partially specified and left to Coun¬ 
cils of Cities. 

Portland, Ore. 

Tenements of 3 stories or over must be 
provided with 1 or more metal fire escapes, 
extending from 1st story to upper stories 
and roof. 2 escapes must be provided when 
population is 100-500 1 additional for every 
additional 500. 

Providence, R. I. 

Every tenement shall have proper means 
of escape in case of fire. Approved by Build¬ 
ing Inspector. 

Richmond. A r n. 

Every bldg. 2 stories or over shall be pro¬ 
vided with fire escapes, stairways or other 
means of egress in case of fire as directed by 
Bldg. Inspector. Outside fire escapes of iron; 
those on inside of fire proof material and 
enclosed in fire proof walls. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Every tenement over 2 stories high must 
have fire escapes opening directly from at 
least 1 room or private hall in each apart¬ 
ment at each story above the ground floor. 
Fire escapes shall be made of iron. The 
number is to be determined by size, struc¬ 
ture, location and number of inmates. 

St, Paul, Minn. 

Every tenement must have sufficient means 
of egress in case of fire. Details of construc¬ 
tion must be approved by Commissioner of 
Public Works. 

Every building 3 stories or more in height 
if not of fire proof construction, shall be pro¬ 
vided with stair fire escapes. 


84 



















1'IllE PRO\ ISIONS—Fire escapes, requirements for and details of construction— Cont’d 


Seattle, Wash. 

Tenements must have sufficient means of 
egress in case of fire. Details of construc¬ 
tion minutely specified in law. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Every tnmt. must have 2 independent 
means of egress accessible from each apart¬ 
ment. If over 3 stories, one escape must be 
enclosed in fire proof wall. 


Toronto, Can. 

Every tnmt. over 2 stories high shall have 
proper fire escapes. The exit from bldg, to 
fire escape platform shall be through a hall 
or corridor. Plans must be approved by 
Bldg. Insp. and by Chief of Fire Dept. 


Washington, D. C. 

Tnmt. of 3 stories or over 30 ft. in height 
must have one or more fire escapes connect¬ 
ed with each floor, as commissioners of dis¬ 
tricts may determine. Plans of proposed 
bldgs, must be given to Inspector of fire es¬ 
capes for examination as to number of es¬ 
capes. Details specified in Bldg. Code. 

Worcester, 31ass. 


FIRE PROVISIONS—Encumbrance of lire escapes 


Baltimore, Md. 

Prohibited. $100 fine. 

Boston, Mass. 

Fire escapes must be unobstructed. 


Bridgeport, Conn. 


Prohibited. 


Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, Mass. 


Prohibited. 


Chicago, Ill. 


Cincinnati, Ohio 

Must open into street, yard, or alley. Can¬ 
not open into court unless court contains 
a fire proof passage. Fire escapes must be 
free from encumbrances. 


Columbus, Ohio 

Must be unobstructed. 


Dayton, Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 

Balconies and stairs to be unobstructed. 

All tenements and hotels having 25 or 
more rooms above the first story shall have 
* or more stairs connecting with ground 
floors. 


Detroit, Mich. 

Prohibited. 

Duluth, 3Iinn. 

Prohibited, must be kept in repair. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 


Prohibited. 

Prohibited. 

Prohibited. 


Louisville, Ky. 
Lowell, Mass. 
Memphis, Tenn. 
Milwaukee, Wis. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Shall be free from obstructions. Shall not 
open into inner courts. 

New Orleans, La. 

Prohibited. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Must be free at all times from obstructions. 
If in court there must be direct passageway 
along ground to street, yard or alley. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Prohibited. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

No obstruction of any kind shall be placed 
on any part of the fire escape; it shall be 


the duty of any authorized inspector to con¬ 
fiscate property found on such fire escape. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 

All fire escapes shall be placed on street 
front or have unobstructed access to street 
or alley along ground. All fire escapes shall 
be kept free from all encumbrances, at all 
times. 

Providence, R. I. 


Richmond, Va. 
Rochester, N. Y. 

Prohibited. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Prohibited. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Prohibited. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Prohibited.. 

Toronto, Can. 

Prohibited. 

Washington, D. C. 

Prohibited. 

Worcester, Mass. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Every tenement must have 1 stairway 
from roof to 1st floor. Tenement over 6 
stories must have 2 such stairways. 

_ Boston, Mass. _ 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Tenement houses occupied by 2 or more 
families to have 2 or more stairs reaching 
from entrance floor to top story. Not to be 
less than 3 ft. wide. If more than 16 rooms 
above the second story, width of stairs shall 
be increased 6 inches for every additional 
16 rooms. 

Calgary, Can. 

The number of stairs shall be in accord¬ 
ance with any requirements of the Dept, of 
Bldgs. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Every floor above 1st shall have two exits 
leading directly to street, placed as far apart 
as practicable. At least one shall continue 
to the roof of flat. 

Chicago, III. 

Every tenement must have 2 flights stairs. 
Non-fire proof tenement of over 80 rooms 
must have additional fire escape for each ad¬ 
ditional 80 rooms or fraction thereof. In fire 
proof tenement of more than 120 rooms an 
additional flight for each additional 12U 
rooms or fraction. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Elaborate details; as good as Model Law. 

Coinmbus, Ohio 
Dayton, Ohio 

Stairs shall ibe in proportion to 3 ft. in 
width plus 1 ft. for hindrance to 100 per¬ 
sons to be accommodated. Each room or 
apartment shall have access to at least 2 
separate and distinct means of egress. 
When such means of egress are placed more 
than 100 ft. apart additional means shall 
be provided. 

Denver, Colo.__ 

Detroit, Mich. 

Buildings over 2 stories and basement high 
shail have 2 separate stairs 3 feet wide 
with 6 inches increase for each additional 
1000 sq. ft. over 2000 sq. ft. ground floor area, 
and increase of 9 inches for every story above 
3. When combined width of stairways ex¬ 
ceeds 9 ft. there shall be 3 stairways. In ten- 


FIRE PROVISIONS—Stairs, number of 

ement with over 100 rooms above 1st story 
there shall be an additional stairway for 
every added 100 rooms or fraction. 

Duluth, Minn. 

Every tenement, with 2 or more families 
above 1st story shall have 2 flights of stairs 
from ground to top floor, 3 % ft. wide. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Flats and apartment houses must have at 
least two stairways. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Lowell, Mass. 

Every tenement hou.se over 2 stories high 
shall have 2 distinct and separate stairs. 

Memphis, Tenn. 

All bldgs, above 2nd story for 10 or more 
persons snail have 2 stairways. To be in¬ 
creased 6 inches in width for each 50 persons 
in excess of 100 until number reaches 350 or 
more then there shall be 3 stairways. 
_Milwaukee, Wis._ 

Nfinneapolis, 31 inn. 

New' Orleans, La. 

Every tenement shall have at least 1 stair¬ 
way from entrance floor to roof. Tenement 
with more than 50 rooms above 1st floor shall 
have an additional stairway for every addi¬ 
tional 50 rooms or fraction. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Every tenement must have at least 2 -stair¬ 
ways leading from entrance floor to top 
story. Stairs must be at least 3 ft. wide. 
Nonrireproof houses with 80 rooms must have 
additional stairs for every additional 80 
rooms. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Tenements, etc., shall have at least 2 stair¬ 
ways, one of which shall extend from the 
ground to the bulkhead and the other from 
the ground to top story. In such buildings 
containing over 36 apartments there shall 
•be an additional stairway for every 36 apart¬ 
ments or fraction thereof. All such addi¬ 
tions may be tower fire escapes. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Tenement over 2 stories must have stair¬ 
way accessible from each apartment. Stairs 


in hallways must be 3 ft. in width for tene¬ 
ment with less than 15 rooms: from 15 to 
25 rooms not less than 3 V 2 ft. in width: or 
25 or more rooms stairs shall be 4 ft. in 
width. 

Portland, Ore. 


Providence, R. I. 


Richmond, Va. 

At least 1 flight of hall stairs shall extend 
to roof and end in bulkhead. Each bldg, 
shall have one continuous line of stairs for 
each 5000 ft. of lot covered, and all bldgs, cov¬ 
ering between 2500 and 5000 ft. shall have 2 
stairs. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Every tenement house shall have one 
flight of stairs reaching from entrance floor 
to roof. Non-fi,reproof buildings must have 
additional flight for every additional 26 
apartments. Fire proof tenements must 
have extra flight for every additional 36 
apartments. 

St. Paul, 31 inn. 

Every tenement more than 2 stories high 
shall have at least 2 separate and distinct 
stairways. 

Seattle, Wash. 

A 2 story tenement shall have 1 stairway; 
3 stories 1 stairway and 1 fire escape. Tnmt. 
more than 3 stories high must have sufficient 
means of egress to satisfy Supt. of Bldg. 
Each suite shall have 2 means of exit with¬ 
out passing any open stairway, elevator 
shaft or light shaft. 

Toledo, Ohio 


Toronto, Can. 

Stairs in tnmts. with 15-25 rooms above 
1st floor shall be 4 ft. wide. Tnmts. with 
more than 25 rooms above 1st floor shall 
have two stairways 3% ft. wide situated at 
opposite ends of bldg. 

Washington, D. C. 

No stairway shall be less than 4 ft. in 
width. Common halls 150 ft. in length fur¬ 
nishing egress for more than 10 apts. of 
3 rooms each must have stairs at each end. 

Worcester, 3Iass. 

Every apartment shall have direct access 
to two stairways leading to the ground. 


FIRE PROVISIONS—Closets under stairs 


Baltimore, Bid. 

Prohibited under 1st story stairs, in non¬ 
fire proof tenement. 

_B oston, 3Iass. _ 

_Br idgeport, Conn. _ 

_ Calgary, Can. _ 


Cambridge, Mass. 

Prohibited under wooden stairways except 
in one or two family dwellings. 

Chicago, Ill. 


Cincinnati, Ohio 

Prohibited. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Prohibited. 


Prohibited. 


Dayton, Ohio 
Denver, Colo. 


Detroit, 3Iieh. 

Closets are prohibited under 1st story stair¬ 
way unless building is fire proof. 

Duluth, 3Iinn. 

Closets under stairs to second story are 
prohibited. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 


Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, 3Iass. 


Prohibited. 


Blem.phis, Tenn. 


3Iilwaukee, Wis. 


3Iinneapolis, Minn. 

Prohibited. 

New Orleans, La. 

Closets under stairs leading from cellar to 
1st floor are prohibited. 

Omaha, Neb. 


Prohibited. 


Paterson, N. J. 


Pennsylvania (3Iodel Law). 

Prohibited. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Port land. Ore. 


Providence, R. I. 


85 
































































FIRE PROVISIONS—Closets under stairs —Cont'd 


Richmond, III. 

No closet with a pitch of less than 5 it. 
shall be erected under staircase. 1st stair¬ 
case may be enclosed for coat closet or toilet 
room. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Prohibited in non-fire proof houses. 


St. Paul, Minn. 

No closet shall be constructed underneath 
the staircase of any story, but the space 
thereunder shall be left entirely open and 
kept from incumbrance, but this shall not 
prohibit the enclosing: without openings the 
under portion of the first story staircase 
from the foot of same to a point where the 
height from the floor line to the soffit of the 
staircase shall not exceed five feet. 


Seattle, Wash. 
Toledo, Ohio 
Toronto, Can. 
Washing-ton, D. C. 
Worcester, Mass. 

Prohibited. 


Ilaltiinore, Md. 


Iloston, Mass. 

Treads of winders on wall side shall be 10 
inches wide. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Prohibited. 

Calgary, Can. 

Winders must be 7 inches wide. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Prohibited. 

Chicago, Ill. 

For winding stairs treads must'be 9Y 2 inch¬ 
es wide and 18 inches from strings on well 
side. 

_ Cincinnat i, Ohio 


Columbus, Ohio 


Dayton. Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 

Prohibited. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Prohibited. 


FIRE PROVISION’S—Winding stairs 
Duluth, Minn. 

Prohibited. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Cowell, Mass. 

Prohibited. 

Meniiphis, Tenn. 

Prohibited. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Prohibited. 

New Orleans, Ca. 

Interior circular fire escapes shall extend 
from top floor to basement. Open into court 
or yard and must be 4% ft. in diameter. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Prohibited. 

Paterson, N. J. 


Pennsylvania (Model Caw). 

Prohibited. 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 


Providence, R. I. 


R ichmond, V a. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Winders shall meet approval of Supt. of 
Bldgs. Width shall be measured 15 inches 
from narrow end. Narrow end must be 5 
inches wide. Wide end not to exceed 30 
inches. 

Toledo. Ohio 

Toronto , Ca n._ 

Washing ton, D. C. 

Worcester. Mass. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Outside stairway shall always be fire 
proof. Inside stairway of non-fire proof 
tenement over 2 stories high shall be fire 
proof. 

Boston, Mass. 

Main staircase of tenements must be fire 
proof material extending from entrance floor 
to roof. Must not extend -below 1st floor. 
Shall be enclosed in fire proof walls. Open¬ 
ings shall have self closing metal doors. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

In buildings exceeding 3 stories in height 
the stair halls shall be enclosed in fire proof 
material. 

Calgary, Can. 

Apts, over 2 stories high shall have stair¬ 
ways of fire proof construction. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

In multiple dwellings exceeding 2 stories 
in height stairway shall be surrounded by 
incumbustible material. Openings to have 
fireproof doors. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Stairs in tenements 3 stories and basement 
in height must be fire proof. 

Cincinnati. Ohio 

Columbus, Ohio 

In non-fire proof tenement houses 3 stories 
high, the stairs and stair halls shall be con¬ 
structed of fire proof material. 

Dayton, Ohio 

All stairs in non-fire proof buildings shall 
be enclosed in fireproof walls and ceilings. 

Denver, Colo. 

Stairs in semi-fire proof, composite or mill 
constructed bldgs, shall be of fire proof 
material. 


FIRE PROVISIONS—Fire proof .stairs 
Detroit, Mich. 

Tenement with ground floor of 1500 sq. ft. 
or over 3 stories and basement high must 
have one story enclosed in fire proof shaft. 
Over 5 stories, one stairway fire proof. 

Duluth, Minn. 

In non-fire proof tenements 3 stories high 
stairs and halls shall be of fire proof material 
throughout. 

Indianapolis, Ind, 

Louisville. Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Men?,phis, Tenn. 

Stairs and stair hallways in nonfireproof 
houses must be enclosed in fire proof mate¬ 
rial. 

Milwaukee, AVIs. 

In tenements 4 stories or more in height 
the stairs shall be constructed of fire proof 
material throughout. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

In multiple dwellings, exceeding 2 stories 
in height occupied by more than 2 families 
on any floor, one stairway must be constructed 
of fire proof material. 

New Orleans, La. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Stairs and stair halls in all new apts. must 
be of incombustible material, except steps 
and handrails. In nonfireproof bldgs, stair 
halls must be enclosed in walls of solid ma¬ 
sonry. 

Paterson, N. J. 

In non-fire proof tenement houses 4 stories 
and basement and over, the stair case halls 
shall be of fire proof material and shall have 
a fire proof hallway connecting with fhe 
street. 


Pennsylvania (Model Law), 

Stairways and walls and ceilings around 
stairways shall be of fire resistive material. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 

The stairs and stair halls in all tenements 
over 4 stories high shall be constructed of 
fire proof material throughout. 

Providence, R. I. 

Stairs shall be fire proof throughout or as 
approved by inspector. 

Richmond, A’a. 

In nonfireproof apartments 4 stories and 
basement, or over, the stairways must be en¬ 
closed in fire proof walls. In fire proof 
houses the stairs shall be of fire proof ma¬ 
terial. 

Rochester, N. A’. 

Inside fire stairways shall be constructed 
entirely of fireproof material enclosed with 
walls and shall connect with passageway 
leading direct to street. Shall have standard 
fire doors. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Tenements shall have outside fire proof 
entrance. 

Seattle, AA'asli. 


Toledo. Ohio 


Toronto, Can. 

Every non-fire proof tnmt, over 3 stories 
and bsmt. in height shall have fire proof 
stairs. 

Washington, D. C. 

Bldgs. 3 stories in height with more than 
one apt. on any floor must have fire proof 
stairs. 

AVorcester, Mass. 


FIRE PROVISIONS—Cellar stairs 


Baltimore, Mil. 

This inside stairway to basement shall be 
enclosed by brick walls and self closing 
doors. 

Boston, Mass. 


Bridgeport, Conn. 


Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, Mass. 


Chicago, Ill. 

Stairways must be enclosed in fire proof 
partitions with self closing doors. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

May be located inside if enclosed in fire 
proof material. Openings to have self clos¬ 
ing fire proof doors a ttop and bottom. 

Columbus, Ohio 

In non-fire proof bldgs, exceeding 2 stor¬ 
ies, cellar stairs to be enclosed with F. P. 
walls; have .self closing doors top and bot¬ 
tom. 

Dayton, Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 

Such stairs not to be located under stairs 
extending above 1st story unless enclosed in 
fire proof wall and has fire doors in base¬ 
ment. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Basement shall have 1 stairway, ?,y 2 ft. 
wide, leading directly (to street, if used for 


living and sleeping) to street, alley or floor 
above. Inside stairs must be enclosed 'by 
brick walls. 

Duluth, Minn. 

In non-fire proof tenement houses over 2 
stories in height, inside cellar stairs shall be 
enclosed with fire proof walls and have self 
closing doors. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 


Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Memphis, Tenn. 

Shall be enclosed in fire proof walls and 
provided with selfclosing doors at bottom. 

Milwaukee, AVIs. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

In multiple dwlgs. must be fire proof con¬ 
struction and have selfclosing doors top ana 
bottom. Brick walls 8 inches. 

New Orleans, La. 


Omaha, Neh. 


Paterson, N. J. 

Shall be enclosed in fire proof walls. Self 
closing doors at top and bottom. 

Pennsylvania (Alodel Law). 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 


Providence, R. I. 


Richmond, A’a. 


Rochester, N. Y. 

Such stairs leading to story above pro¬ 
hibited in no-fireproof houses, but not in 
fireproof houses. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

The stairs from the cellar or lowest story 
to the floor next above when placed within 
any apartment house or tenement house, shall 
be located, when practical, to the rear of the 
staircase leading from the first story to the 
upper story, and in all cases be enclosed with 
'brick or stone walls, and such stairway shall 
be provided with self-closing fireproof doors 
at the top and bottom of said flight of stairs. 

Seattle, AA’ash. 


Toledo, Ohio 


Toronto, Can. 


Washington, D. C. 

Cellar stairs must terminate in fire proof 
compartment. 

AA r oreester, Mass. 

Must not be under stairs leading from 1st 
floor to floors above. Brick or masonry 
walls with self closing fire dooirs. 


S6 




















































































Baltimore, Md. 

Outside stairway shall be fire proof. 
Boston, Mass. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Calgary’, Can. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 
Columbus, Ohio 
Dayton, Ohio 
Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mieh. 

Outside stairways except in frame build¬ 
ings shall be fire proof. 

Duluth, Minn. 

Tenement over 3 stories high shall have 
outside cella entrance. 

Indianapolis, Iiul. 


FIRE PROVISIONS—Cellar entrance 
Louisville, Ky. 

Lowell, Mass, 

Memphis, Tenn. 

Milwaukee. W'ls. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

In multiple dwellings there shall be outside 
entrance. 

New Orleans, fa, 


Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 


Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

There shall be an entrance to every cellar 
and basement from the outside. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 


Providence, R. I. 


Richmond, Va. 


Rochester, N. Y. 

Outside in non-fire proof houses. 


St. Paul, Minn. 

Whenever the basement or cellar of a 
building is used for a sales room or for 
manufacturing purposes, it shall haye a stair¬ 
case at least three feet wide leading direct 
to the street or outside, for every five thous¬ 
and square feet of lot area, or part thereoi, 
covered by the same and shall have at least 
one continuous line of stairs for each five 
thousand square feet of lot area, or part 
thereof, covered in excess of that required 
for five thousand square feet or area. 

Whenever it may be practicable to furnish 
a number of outside entrances as required 
by this Code, stairways shall be constructed 
leading to the first floor as near as possible 
to the outside entrance as in the opinion of 
the Commissioner of Public Works will af¬ 
ford an adequate exit from said basement. 

Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 


_ Toronto, Can. _ 

Washington, D, C. 

■Worcester, Mass. 

Must be an entrance from yard or court 
into every cellar or basement. 


Baltimore, Md. 
Boston, Mass. 


Bridgeport, Conn. 

In apartment houses the partitions be¬ 
tween apts. where not separated by halls 
shall be of fire proof material. 

Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, Mass. 


Chicago, Ill. 


Cincinnati, Ohio 


Columbus, Ohio 

Where houses are built in form of double 
houses, terraces or rows there shall be a fire 
proof wall separating them. Provided that 
this shall not apply to double frame houses. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Hotels and tenements built in connection 
with other buildings shall be separated 
from them by standard fire walls. Hotels 
and tenements of non-fire proof construction 
shall be subdivided by standard Are prool 
walls into floor areas of not more than 5000 
sq. ft. each. 

Denver, Colo._ __ 

Detroit. Mich. 



FIRE PROVISIONS—Fire stops 
Duluth, Minn. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

All buildings of more than 3 flats or apart¬ 
ments shall have division walls of brick or 
other non-combustible material. 

Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Meni.phis, Tenn. 

Each room or suite of rooms shall be sepa¬ 
rated from other apartments of the bldg, by a 
fire proof wall at least 13 inches thick. 

Milwaukee, Wls. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 


New Orleans, La. 


Omaha, Neb. 

In every nonfireproof house there shall be 
dividing wall of solid masonry extending 
from ground to roof between each set of 
apts. 

Paterson, N. J. 


Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

In tenements of other than fl,re resistive 
construction, in all walls where wooden fur¬ 
ring is used, the 2 courses of brick below 
the top of the floor beam shall project one 
and one-half inches beyond the furring, and 


shall be levelled off with plaster to the top 
of the beams after beams are in place to 
form a fire stop. If concerte or other mate¬ 
rials are used for walls an equivalent projec¬ 
tion shall be provided. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 


Providence, R. I. 

Richmond, Va. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Partitions between apartments, not sepa¬ 
rated by halls or stairways shall be made of 
incombustible material. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

All non-fire-proof apartment houses or 
tenement houses hereafter erected, 3 stories 
and basement in height, but not exceeding 
50 ft. shall have exterior or enclosing walls 
composed of brick, stone, concrete or in¬ 
combustible material. 

Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 
Toronto, Can. 
Washington, D. C. 
Worcester, Mass. 


Baltimore, Md. 


Boston, Mass. 

Tenements shall have fire proof bulkheads 
with fire proof covering, and stairs leading 
to it. Tenements under 65 ft. may have 
bulkhead of wood, covered with metal on 
outside and plaster on metal lath on inside, 
having covered metal door. All other tene- 
merits shall have bulkhead or scuttle located 
in hall and shall not be locked at any time. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 


Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, Mass. 

Must be kept unlocked. 

Chicago, Ill. 


Cincinnati, Ohio 

Existing buildings shall be provided with 
a ladder and scuttle door to the roof at the 
head of the stairs, or there shall be posted ac 
the head of the stairs a direction to the 
ladder. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Must be provided in all tenements over 2 
stories. Must be covered on outside with 
metal and provided with stairs or stationary 
ladder; located in hall; shall not be kept 
locked. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Shall be provided in buildings over 25 ft. 
high. Shall be covered on outside with 
metal, located in the hall, shall have stairs 
or ladder leading to them, and shall not be 
provided with locks. 

Denver, Colo. 

All bldgs, over one story shall have scut¬ 
tles in roof covered with incombustible ma¬ 
terials. Ladders of iron must connect them 
with floors below. The lid of a scuttle must 
not be locked. 


FIRE PROVISIONS—Scuttles ami bulkheads 
Detroit, Mich. 


Duluth, Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Must be provided on all fiat roof buildings 
of more than 2 stories in height. Must have 
stairs or stationary ladders which must be 
kept free from 1 obstruction. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Must be accessible to tenants and must not 
be locked. 

Lowell, Mass. 

Shall be provided in buildings 2 or more 
stories in height having flat roofs. Must 
be provided with ladders or stairs and kept 
unlocked. 

Memphis, Tenn. 

At least one flight of stairs shall reach 
to roof and there have exit. Scuttles and 
bulkheads must be made of fire proof ma¬ 
terial and open outwardly. 

Milwaukee, Wls. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Every flat roofed multiple dwelling more 
than one story or occupied by more than 2 
families on a floor shall have in roof buldhead 
or scuttle not less than 2x3 ft. If more than 
2 stories, shall have ladders or stairs leading 
to buldheads or scuttles. Shall not be located 
in closet or room. 

New Orleans, La. 


Omaha, Neb. 

There shall be in the roof of every new 
tenement at least one bulkhead or scuttle, 
fire proof or covered with fire proof material 
with stairs or ladder leading to them'. No 
scuttle or bulkhead shall have any lock on it. 

Paterson, N. J. 

At least one flight of stairs shall connect 
with scuttle or bulkhead. Scuttles or bulk¬ 
heads shall not be kept locked. 


Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

In tenements, ect., there shall be at least 
one bulkhead located in the ceiling of the 
common hall of the top story. Its size shall 
be not less than 24x30 inches. Access there¬ 
to shall be by means of stairs. It shall not 
have any lock on it. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 

Must be provided in buildings over one 
story high. Must be located in hall, be con¬ 
structed of fire proof material. Scuttles 
must be kept free from obstructions. 

Providence, R. I. 


Richmond, Va. 

Must be constructed of fire proof material. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Must be provided in all tenements of more 
than 2 stories in height. Must be of fire 
proof material in fireproof buildings and 
may be of wood in non-fireproof buildings. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

All buildings over 2 stories in height shall 
have scuttles in roof, covered with incom¬ 
bustible material and ladder or stairs per¬ 
manently attached leading thereto from the 
floor below—not less than 20x30 feet, must 
not be locked. 

Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 


Toronto, Can. 


Washington, D. C. 


Worcester, Mass. 

Apartment houses must be provided with 
bulkheads or scuttles to be determined by 
class of apartment. Bulkheads must have 
stairs with rails leading to roof. Scuttles 
must be in hall and not in any room. 
Doors on scuttles or bulkheads must never 
be locked. 


87 








































































































FIRE PROVISIONS—Shafts 


Baltimore, Md, 

Construction of shafts is subject to ap¬ 
proval of Inspector of Buildings. 

Boston, Mass. 

Shafts and dumb waiters In tenements 
more than 3 stories high must be enclosed 
in fireproof material and provided with fire 
proof self closing door. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Walls of shafts, dumb waiters, etc., must 
be of fire proof material. 

Calgary, Can. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Vent shafts and shaft ways shall be en¬ 
closed if they extend through more than 2 
stories. Must be fitted with approved fire 
doors and fire windows. 

Chicago, III. 

Shafts must ibe fireproof. There must be 
wall of solid masonry from ground to roof 
between apartments. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Shall be covered with fire proof material 
in non-fire proof buildings. 

Columbus. Ohio 


Dayton, Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

See “Fire proof stairs.” 


Duluth, Minn. 

Shafts from bakeries must be of brick at 
least 8 inches thick. 

Memphis, Tenn. 

Dumb waiter shafts in fire proof bldgs, can 
be enclosed with fire proof partition with 
fire proof doors. Openings must have doors 
kept closed when not in use. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

Shall be constructed of fire proof material 
throughout. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

In multiple dwellings shafts, elevators or 
dumb waiters shall be constructed of fire 
proof material. Dumb waiters must have 
fire proof doors at openings. 

New Orleans, La. 

Shaft shall be fire proof throughout with 
standard fire doors at all openings at each 
story. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Shall be constructed of fire proof material. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Shafts and dumb waiters shall 'be enclosed 
in fire proof material. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Shall be enclosed in walls of fire resistive 
material and there shall be no openings ex¬ 
cept for doors and skylights. 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 

All shafts and clothes chutes shall be en¬ 
closed on four sides. Walls plastered on 
metal lath or lined with metal. 

Providence, R. I. 

All shafts in non-fire proof buildings shall 
be enclosed in brick or other fire proof mater¬ 
ial approved by Building Inspector. 

Richmond, Va. 

Shafts and dumb waiters shall be enclosed 
with fire proof material. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

See “Halls and Stair Partitions.” 

Seattle, Wash. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Toronto, Can. 

Walls of shafts shall be of brick or other 
fire proof construction throughout. 

Washington, D. C. 

Elevator and light shafts shall be fire 
proof as specified in “Fire Proof Stairs.” 

Worcester, 3Iass. 

Shafts must be constructed of masonry. 


FIRE PROVISIONS—Bakeries and dangerous businesses 


Baltimore, Md. 

Boston, Mass. 

Prohibited in non-fire proof tenements un¬ 
less rooms where such business is carried 
on are enclosed in fire proof walls and ceil¬ 
ing. No opening between rooms and other 
parts of tenement. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 


Calgary, Can. 

No person shall conduct any place for 
boiling soap, running candles, melting tallow 
or any dangerous business without permit 
from Supt. of Bldgs. 

_Cambridge, Mass._ 

Chicago, Ill. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 
Columbus, Ohio 

Shall not be maintained in non-fire proof 
tenement house unless such room where it 
is carried on is enclosed in fire proof walls 
and no openings shall connect with any 
other part of the tenement. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Rooms used for such businesses shall be 
enclosed by standard fire proof walls and 
openings shall be covered with fire proof 
doors. 

Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 


Duluth, Minn. 

Bakeries are prohibited except in fire proof 
tenement. Openings from places where 
paints, oils, spirituous liquors or drugs are 
kept into hall or stairway used by tenants 
are prohibited. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Prohibited in tenement houses of nonfire- 
proof construction. 

_ Lowell, Mass. _ 

_ .Memphis, Tenn. _ 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Prohibited in multiple dwellings. 

New Orleans, La. 

Bakeries prohibited except in fire proof 
tenements, unless ceiling and walls are made 
fire proof. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Prohibited in non-fire proof tenements un¬ 
less room in which business is carried on is 
enclosed in fire proof walls and all openings 
are provided with standard fire doors. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Shops dealing in inflammable materials are 
prohibited. Shops dealing in materials that 
are not easily inflammable will be permitted 
provided there is no communication between 
them and other parts of building. Bakeries 
with dumb waiters will be permitted in 


buildings of fire resistive material provided 
the openings are covered with fire proof 
doors. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

No horse, cow, pig, sheep, goat or poultry 
shall be kept. Cannot be used for dangerous 
or combustible articles. 

Portland, Ore. 

Providence, R. I. 

Richmond, Va. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Prohibited in non-fireproof tenement houses. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

No bakery in non-fire proof tenement un¬ 
less ceiling and sides are fire proof. Opening 
from places where paint, oil or spirituous 
liquors are stored shall be protected by tire 
proof doors or closed up solidly. 

Seattle, Wash, 

Toledo, Ohio 

Toronto, Can. 

Permit must be secured from Committee 
on Property before bakers’ ovens may be in¬ 
stalled. 

Washington, D, C. 

AVorcester, Mass. 

Shall not be maintained in non-fire proof 
houses unless such bakery or other business 
is made safe by fire proof material around 
it. There shall be no openings between such 
place and any other part of building. 


Baltimore, Aid. 

Interior lots. Required at rear of every 
tenement and must extend across entire lot 
free from ground to sky. Minimum width 
12 ft. Increased 1 ft. for every additional 12 
ft.ft. above 60 ft. in height of tenement. 

Corner lot. Lots 100 ft. in depth, minimum 
10 ft. Lots less than 100 ft. in depth 10% of 
depth of lot, but never less than 5 ft. 

Boston, Mass. 

Yard shall extend full width of lot and 
unobstructed from ground to sky. Corner 
lots, minimum depth 6 ft. Corner lots over 
25 ft. wide, 12 ft., other lots, 12 ft. If the 
building is in excess of 50 ft. high, the yard 
shall be increased in depth one foot for 
every additional 10 ft. Yard not required 
when (1) tenement abuts on railway, cem¬ 
etery or park. (2) When surrounded on 2 
sides by streets or alleys more than 15 ft. 
wide (3) Located on lot which runs through 
block, etc. (See p. 72 of Building Law.) 

Bridgeport, Conn. 


Calgary, Can. 

At the rear of every lot there should be a 
yard open and unobstructed 10 ft. wide. 
Shall be increased 10% of lot area for every 
story above. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Interior lots. For tenements 2 stories high 
yard shall be 10 ft. deep. For each additional 
story the depth of the yard shall be increased 
2 ft. The depth of a yard on a corner lot 
may be reduced to one half that of inner 
lots for a length not exceeding 50 ft. Excep¬ 
tions the same as in Benton Code. 

Chicago, III. 

Interior lots. Every tenement unless 
abutting on alley must have yard at rear 
minimum 10 percent of lot. Increased 1 per¬ 
cent in area for each story over three. Min¬ 
imum 10 ft. 


YARDS 

Corner Lots. Minimum 8 percent of area 
of lot. Increased 1 percent for each story 
over three. Minimum 10 ft. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Yards, extending across lot, and 10 ft. 
deep required for interior lots. Side yards 
shall not ibe less than 4 ft. When buildings 
on side yards are from 24 to 36 ft. high, side 
yards shall be 5 ft. wide. For every 12 ft. 
in height above 36, % ft. shall be added to 
side yard. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Every tenement shall be provided with 
rear yard the entire width of the lot and 18 
ft. deep on inner lots and 15 ft. deep on cor¬ 
ner lots. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Width—across lot. 

Depth. 

Corner lot minimum 10 ft. 

Other lots minimum 15 ft. 

When buildings are over 2 stories, 2 ft. 
shall be added to yard for each additional 
story. If tenement occupies 100 per cent of 
lot a roof garden shall be provided in lieu 
of a yard. 

Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Interior lots. Tenement must front on a 
street 40 ft. wide or an alley 30 ft. wide, or 
else be set back distance so as to make the 
open area in front of tenement equal to these 
distances. Tenement must have rear yard 15 
ft. with 1 ft. added for each additional 10 ft. 
in height for building over 25 ft. 

Corner lot 80 percent. 

Duluth, Minn. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Shall extend across entire lot. Corner lot 
yards shall be 15 ft deep; interior lots shall 
be 25 ft. deep unless depth of lot is less than 
100 ft. then yard shall be 25% of yard depth, 
but never less than 10 ft. If the house 


exceeds 3 stories in height, the depth shall 
be increased 3 ft. for each story over 3. Side 
yards shall not be less than 4 ft. in width. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Where tenement is 3 stories in height, 
yard shall be 15 ft. deep and shall be increased 
1 ft. for each additional story; decreased 1 
ft. for every story less than 3 stories in 
height; but it shall never be less than 12 ft. 
in depth. If there are no windows in the rear 
of a tenement no yard is required. 

Lowell, Mass. 


Memphis, Tenn. 

Shall be 10 ft. deep for 4 story bldgs. May 
be decreased 1 ft. in depth for every story less 
than 4; shall be increased % ft. for every 
story more than 4. Corner lots shall have 
yards 5 ft. deep. Shall not be decreased or 
need not be increased for bldgs, of different 
heigdits. 

Milwaukee, AVis. 

Shall extend across the entire width of lot 
and shall be 14 the height of the tenement, 
but never less than 10 ft. measured to cen¬ 
ter of alley if there is one. For corner lots, 
yards must be 10 ft. deep unless lots are less 
than 100 ft. then they shall be 10% of lot. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Shall extend across entire lot. In no case 
shall a yard be less than 15 ft. deep. For a 3 
story bldg, yard shall be 25% of lot; for 
every story above this the depth of the yard 
shall increase '5Vo. Side yards for 1 story 
dwellings shall be not less than 4 ft. to side 
lot line; 2 stories 5 ft.; 3 stories, 7 ft, for 
each story above three, space shall increase 
2 ft. in width. 

New Orleans, La. 

Interior lots. Every tenement 50 ft. or 
less in height shall have a yard not less 
than 12 ft. in every part. To be increased 1 
ft. for every additional 10 ft. in height. 


88 






































Corner lots. Not less than 6 ft. in every 
part for building- 50 ft. in height. That por¬ 
tion of lot in excess of 30 ft. shall have a 
yard 12 ft. deep to be increased in depth as 
provided for in interior lots. 

Omalm, Neb. 

Shall be a yard at least 10 ft. wide, un¬ 
less the rear of lot abuts on alley, in which 
case the rear line of bldg, shall be not less 
than 16 ft. from opposite side of alley. Yard 
shall be 8% of area of lot on corner lots 
and 10% on other lots. Yard shall be in¬ 
creased 1% of area for every story above 
three. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Yard shall extend across lot and shall not 
be less than 14 ft. on inner lots. On corner 
lots it shall not be less than 10 ft. deep. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law), 

The building shall be so located on the 
lot ,so that there shall be a yard at least 8 
feet in depth. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Interior lots. Yard must be 20 percent of 
area and 8 ft. in width. 

Corner lots. 10 percent of area and 8 ft. 
in width. 


YAHDS- Cont’d 
Portland, Ore. 


Providence, R. 1. 


_ Richmond, Va. _ 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Corner lots—yard must be 10 feet in 
depth, unless lot is less than 100 feet deep 
then yard may be 25 per cent of lot, but 
never less than 5 feet. That part in excess 
of 50 feet must conform to .requirements 
for interior yards. 

Interior lots—minimum of 12 feet for a 
building 60 feet in height. For every ad¬ 
ditional 12 feet in height it shall be in¬ 
creased 1 foot in depth. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Interior lots. Yards must be 10 ft. deep 
for 4 stories on inside lot and extend across 
entire lot. Increased 6 inches for every 
added story. Decreased 1 ft. for every story 
less than 4. 

Corner lots. Must be 5 ft. for full width 
of lot. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Interior lots. Yards shall not be less than 
one-eighth of depth of lots. Minimum 5 ft. 


Shall be increased 1% of area of lot for each 
story above 3. 

Corner lots. Yard shall not be less than 
1-16 of depth of lot. Need not be increased 
with height of building. 

Toledo, Ohio 
Toronto, Can. 

Every tenement shall have a yard 500 sq. 
ft. in area, for each suite of apts. on the 
floor having the greatest number of suites. 

Washington, D. C. 

Interior lots. Yards must be 10 ft. in 
depth for building 25 ft. high, or 5 ft. where 
5 ft. side yard exists. Three inches increase 
for each additional foot in height of build¬ 
ing. On lot over 100 ft. deep without side 
yard, 6 inch increase for each foot, except 
that Vi of street or alley adjacent to yard 
may be included in same with minimum of 
5 feet unobstructed. 

Corner lots. Corner lots less than 75 feet 
deep and not over 50 ft. wide need no yard. 

Worcester, Mass. 

Shall be 12 ft. deep for houses 3 stories 
in height. Depth shall be increased 3 ft. 
for each additional story. 


Ilaltiinore, M(1. 

Corner lot 90%. 

Interior lot 70%. 

Boston, Mass. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Calgary, Can, 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Corner lot, above 1st story, 85 per cent. 
Street on three sides 90 percent. Interior lot, 
75 percent. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Corner lots for first 20 ft. may be 100 per 
cent occupied. Inside lots not more than 
70 per cent may be occupied, except when 
area of lot is less than 3000 sq. ft. 75 per 
cent may be occupied; when less than 2000 
sq. ft. 80 per cent may be occupied. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Corner lots with streets on 3 sides, 75% 

Other corner lots 80% 

Inner lots 60% 

Measurements shall be taken from ground 
level. 

Dayton, Ohio 

No building shall occuply such percent 
of the lot as will hinder its lighting and ven¬ 
tilation. 

Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Corner lots same as above. 

Interior lots 70 percent. 

Dulut h, Minn. _ 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Corner lots. 

Streets on 3 sides 90% 

Other corner lots 85% 

Inner lots 65% 


PER CENT OF LOT OCCUPIED 
Louisville, Ky. 

A minimum of 80% on corner lots; and of 
70% on other lots. The space that the house 
sets back on the lot shall be counted as oc¬ 
cupied. 

Lowell, Mass. 


Mem,phis, Tenn. 

Same as Model Law. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

90% of corner lot. 

75% of other lots. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Corner lots with street on 3 sides, 90%. 
Other corner lots, 80%. Interior lots 65%. 

New Orleans. La. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Corner lots 85%. Fire proof bldgs, corner 
lots 90%. Corner lots with streets on 3 
sides 90%. Other lots 75%. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Not more than 90% of corner lot or more 
than 70% of any other lot. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Not more than 90 per cent of a corner lot 
and not more than 70 per cent of inner lot. 
Measurements shall be taken from the 
ground and the unoccupied percentage shall 
be free from the ground to the sky. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Corner lots, streets 20 ft. wide 90 per¬ 
cent. 

Corner lots, street not less than 20 ft. wide 
on three sides. 100 percent. 

Interior lot. 80 percent. 

Portland, Ore. 

Buildings shall be so placed as to receive 
natural light and ventilation. 


Providence, R. I. 

Corner lot 95 percent. 

Interior lot 80 per cent. 

- _ Richm ond, Va .__ 

Rochester, N. V. 

Same as Model Law, except it does not 
apply to tenements running thru from one 
street to another if such lot is less than 100 
feet deep. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Corner lot 90%. 

Interior lot 70%. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Fire iproof bldgs, used for tnmts. or apts. 
above 1st .story and for other purposes be¬ 
low may have cellar and bsmt. covering the 
entire lot and 1st story covering the entire 
width of lot if the lower stories are sup¬ 
plied with light, air and ventilation. No 2nd 
or 3rd story of any bldg, shall cover a 
greater % than as follows: 

Corner lot on 2 streets 83%; Corner lot on 
2 streets and alley 85%; Corner lot on 3 
streets 87%; Lot surrounded by thorough¬ 
fares 100%; Interior lot on one street 
73%; Interior lot on one street and an alley, 
75%; Interior lot on 2 streets 77%. 

_Toledo, Ohio _ 

Toronto, Can. 

Bldgs, on business streets may cover the 
entire area of lot for such stories as are 
used for business purposes only. 

Washington, D. C. 

Corner lot not less than 75 ft. deep and 
not over 50 ft. wide, 100%. Triangular or 
irregular shaped lot extending from street 
to street 100%. Corner lot 90%; interior lot 
75%. 

Worcester, Mass. 

Corner lots 80 per cent. 

Others 70 per cent. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Rear tenements forbidden unless rear of 
lot abuts on street 40 ft. wide. 

_ Boston, Mass. _ 

_ Bridgeport, Conn. _ 

__Calgary, Can._ 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Forbidden except on corner lots. 

_Cincinnati. Ohio__ 

Columbus, Ohio 

Must front on street. 

Dayton, Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Duluth, Minn. 

Tenement must have one side fronting on 
street. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Prohibited unless such tenement abutts on 
two streets and located on outside corner of 
lot. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Prohibited. 

Lowell, Mass. 


REAR TENEMENTS 
Memphis, Tenn. 

Prohibited unless six foot sidewalk is 
left between bldg, and alley curb. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

Permitted if there is a yard of 15 ft. be¬ 
tween it and rear of other tenements. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Prohibited. 

New Orleans, La. 


Omaha, Neb. 

When a tenement house stands on a lot 
other than a corner lot, no other bldg, shall 
be placed in front or rear of it, unless the 
minimum distance between such buildings be 
10 ft. If they are one story building 5 ft. 
shall be added to this space for each addi¬ 
tional story. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Prohibited. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law-). 

May be erected, provided (1) lot on which 
it stands is bounded by a street on one side 
and an alley on the other not less than 20 
feet in width. (2) That the distance of 
buildings on same lot shall be at least 16 
feet. (3) The rear of such building having 
its principal entrance on the street shall 
not approach nearer the alley than 6 feet 
and where the principal entrance is on the 
alley the rear of such building shall not ap¬ 
proach nearer the street than 16 feet. 


Pittsburgh. Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 
Providence, R. I. 


Richmond, Va. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Prohibited. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Seattle, Wash. 

No tenement may be built on the inside of 
a rear lot unless there is a straight pas¬ 
sageway to the street equal in width to % 
of the width of the lot. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Toronto, Can. 

No tenement shall be erected on any 
street, lane, alley or other place less than 40 
ft. in width unless such street is a public 
highway. 

Washington, D. C. 

Bldg, on a court or alley cannot be higher 
than the distance from the opposite side of 
the open space on which it fronts. Tene¬ 
ment cannot be placed on any alley less than 
30 ft. wide and not supplied with sewage, 
water mains and light. 

Worcester, Mass. 

Space between them and buildings on 
front of lot shall be twice the depth of 
yards. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Height shall not exceed iy 2 times width of 
street. 


Boston, Mass. 


HEIGHT 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Calgary, Can. 

No bldg, can be over 130 ft. in height. 


Cambridge, Mass. 

One story for each 10 ft. of street width, 
except for streets 40 ft. wide, which may 
have one story for 8 ft. of street width. 


89 























































Chicago, III. 

Height shall not exceed one and one-half 
times the width of the street. 

_ Cincinna t i, Ohio _ 

Col uni Inis, Ohio 

Shall not exceed width of widest street on 
which it stands unless it stands back at a 
distance that equals the excess height, 

_ Dayton, Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 


Detroit, Mich. 

Shall not exceed in height the width of the 
widest street on which it abuts, never higher 
than 100 ft. Does not apply to hotels. 

_ Duluth, Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Same as Model Law. 

Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Mem.phis, Tenn. 

Shall be properly lighted by windows open¬ 
ing into outer air. 


HEIGHT —ConCd 
Milwaukee, Wis. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Shall not exceed the width of widest street 
upon which it abuts. 

In no case shall it exceed 6 stories or more 
than 75 ft. 

_ New Orleans, La._ 

Omaha, Neb. 

Same as Model Law. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Shall not exceed by more than one-half the 
width of the widest street on which it abuts. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Shall not be more than one and one-half 
times as high as the widest street on which 
building faces; nor shall it be more than 5 
stories high. In estimating the height the 
distance the building sets back from curb 
line may be added to the width of the street. 

Pittsburgh. Pa. 

Portland, Ore. 

Shall not exceed two times the width of 
widest adjoining street. In no case shall any 
tenement exceed 120 ft. 


Providence, R. 1» 

_ Richmond, Va. _ 

Rochester, N. Y. 

.Shall not exceed by more than one-fourth 
the width of the widest street on which it 
abuts, nor four times the average of its 
horizontal dimensions. 

St. 1*0111, Minn. __ 

Seattle, Wash. 

No fire proof tnmt. shall exceed in height 
the width of the widest adjoining street 
plus 25 ft. and in no case 125 ft. 

__Toledo, Ohio __ 

__ Tor o nto, Ca n.__ 

Washington, D. C. 

On a business street the height of a bldg, 
shall not be more than the width of the 
street on which it fronts, increased by 20 ft. 
Never over 130 ft. except on the north side 
of Pennsylvania Ave. where the limit is 
160 ft. 

Worcester, 31 ass. 

Same as Model Law. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Halls should have 18 sq. ft. of glass per 
floor. One window shall be 5% ft. high. 

Boston, Mass. 

Same as Model Law; except in place of 
window at end of hall there may be windows 
along sides at intervals of 20 ft. There shall 
be skylights over stairwells. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Calgary, Can. 

There must be a ventilating skylight at 
least 25 sq. ft. in area. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Each hall shall have at least one window 
opening into street, yard, court or vent shaft. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Minimum window area per floor is 12 sq. ft 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Must open on street, yard or court. There 
shall be not less than 12 sq. ft. Shall either 
have window at end or windows along side 
at intervals of 20 ft. Skylight may be sub¬ 
stituted for windows if it provides adequate 
light and ventilation. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Same as Model Law. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Shall have window or skylight suitable 
to light the same. 

_ Denver, Co lo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Each hall shall have 15 sq. ft. glass area. 
Skylight must have 20 sq. ft. glass. 100 sq. 
inch opening. 


HALL WINDOWS 

Duluth, 3Iinn. 

Halls must have 10 sq. ft. of glass per 
story. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Same as Model Law. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Shall have a window at end of hall or win¬ 
dows along sides at intervals of 20 ft. A 
skylight over each stair well. 

Lowell, Mass. 


31enT>phis, Tenn. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

At least one window must have 10 sq. ft. 
of glass area. In tnmts. 3 or more stories 
high, when halls on each floor are not pro¬ 
vided with window a ventilating skylight 
shall be placed over each stairway. 

31inneapolls, Minn. 

Every hall shall have 1 window opening 
on st., yd., or ct. Such window shall be at 
end of hall parallel to halls’ axis; or windows 
may be in side of hall at intervals of 20 ft. 
Any partition offset, shall be separately 
lighted, according to above requirements. 
One of such windows shall be 2% x5 meas¬ 
ured between stopheads. Skylight shall be 
required over each stair well. 

New Orleans, La. 

In every tenement hall there shall 'be 15 sq. 
ft. window area on each floor. 

Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 

Shall have one window in end of hall or 
one window at intervals of 20 ft. along side 
of hall. 


Pennsylvania (3Iodel Law). 

Every hall shall have at least one window 
opening on street, yard or court. Any part 
of hall shut off from the other part shall be 
deemed a separate hall and be provided with 
a separate window. 1 of such windows in 
each hall shall be at least 2 feet 6 inches 
high. Top story may have a ventilating sky¬ 
light. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 


Providence, R. I. 

_ Richmond, Va. _ 

Rochester, N, Y. 

St. Paul, 3Iinn. 

In tenement over 3 stories high hall win¬ 
dow must be 2% ft. wide and 5 ft. high. If 
there is no window in hall opening directly 
to outer air sash doors shall be provided. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Every hall must have one window open¬ 
ing directly to the outer air or transoms 
with 15 sq. ft. of glass area. 

Toledo, Ohio 

_ Toronto, Can. _ 

Washington, D. C. 

Worcester, 31 ass. 

Each hall shall have at least one window 
opening on street, yard or court. Any part 
shut off from main part shall be separately 
lighted. At least one window in each hall 
shall have 12% sq. ft. of glass. 


Stories 


Baltimore, 3Id. 

Min. area of crt. Min. width of crt. 


2 

100 

sq. 

ft. 

6 

ft. 

3 

150 

sq. 

ft. 

7 

ft. 

4 

225 

sq. 

ft. 

8 

ft. 

5 

300 

sq. 

ft. 

9 

ft. 

6 

350 

sq. 

ft. 

11 

ft. 

7 

540 

sq. 

ft. 

13 

ft. 

8 

750 

sq. 

ft. 

16 

ft. 

9 

1,100 

sq. 

ft. 

20 

ft. 

10 

1,600 

sq. 

ft. 

24 

ft. 

Outer 

Courts. See 

outer 

lot line 


and Inner Courts. 


Boston, 3Iass. 

Courts—Outer. No court shall be covered 
by roof or skylight. Shall be six feet wide 
for tenements of 50 ft. in height when 
measured from lot line; when located be¬ 
tween wings it shall be 12 ft. wide for tene¬ 
ments 50 ft. in height. For each additional 
10 ft. in height courts .shall be increased 1 
foot in width. Depth shall never exceed 
four times width. 

Courts—Inner. Width of courts on inner 
lot line shall be 8 ft. measured from lot line; 
when enclosed on all 4 sides it shall be 16 
ft. wide and shall be increased 1 ft. for every 
additional 10 ft. in height. 


Bridgeport, Con n. 


Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, 3Ias». 

Courts, Inner. When an inner lot line mini¬ 
mum width shall be 7 ft. for first story and 
one additional foot for each story. Area shall 
be 150 sq. ft. for 1st story 50 sq. ft. for each 
additional story. When enclosed on all four 
sides, minimum width for 1st story shall be 
12 ft.; 2 additional feet for each additional 
story. Minimum area shall be 200 sq. ft.; 
100 sq. ft. additional for every additional 
story. 

Courts, Outer. When an outer lot line it 
shall be 6 ft. wide for 1st story and 1 addi¬ 
tional foot for every additional story. When 
located 'between wings it shall be 10 ft. wide 
for 2 story tenements and 2 additional feet 


COURTS 


for each additional story in height. May be 
less than minimum width required provided 
length is not greater than width. 


Chicago, Ill. 

Height of Minimum width Minimum 

bldg. of court area 

1 story 6 feet 100 sq. ft. 

2 stories 6 feet 120 sq. ft 

3 stories 8 feet 160 sq. ft 

4 stories 8 feet 160 sq. ft. 

5 stories 12 feet 260 sq. ft. 

6 stories 16 feet 400 sq. ft 

7 stories 20 feet 625 sq. ft. 

8 stories 24 feet 840 sq. ft. 

Court shall have opening to street 2 ft. wide 

and 15 ft. high (except tenements on lots 
25 ft. in width which can have lot line court 
of 50 sq. ft. if 2 stories, 60 sq. ft. if 3 stories 
high). (Except 3 story tenement which can 
have a 3 ft. wide continuous lot line passage 
open to sky if on a 25 ft. wide lot, and a 3% 
ft. passage if on a lot 30 feet wide.) 


Cincinnati, Ohio 

Inner Courts. Minimum width, 8 ft. 
Length, 20 ft. Width shall be increased % 
ft. for every 12 ft. in height over 36. 

Outer Courts. On lot line they shall have 
minimum width of 8 ft. and length of 2 ft. 
Width shall be increased % ft. for every 
additional 12 ft. in height over 36. 


Columbus, Ohio 

Inner Courts. Shall never be less than 
twice width of outer courts. 

Outer Courts. For 2 story tenement not 
less than 10 ft. wide, width shall increase 2 
ft. for each additional story. :>io court shall 
be covered by roof or skylight. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Inner Courts. Minimum width shall be 
6 ft. for first 15 ft. in height. For each ad¬ 
ditional 5 ft. in neight the width shall be 
increased 1 ft. Area shall be 1% times 
minimum width. 

Outer Courts. Minimum width shall be 3 
ft. for first 15 ft. and for each additional 5 
ft. the width shall be increased 6 inches. 


Denver, Colo. 


Detroit, 3Iich. 

Height of building. Width of court. 

1 story 5 feet 

2 stories 6 feet 

3 stories 7 feet 

Shall increase two feet for every addition¬ 
al story above three. Length shall never be 
greater than five times width. No court shall 
be covered by skylight. 

Inner courts shall never be less than twice 
the minimum width prescribed for outer 
court. 

Otherwise same as out courts. 

__Dulutli, Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Outer Courts. Shall be open at top. For 
a two story building the minimum width 
shall be 10 ft. For each additional story the 
width shall increase 2 ft. 

Inner Courts. Minimum width shall never 
be less than twice minimum of outer courts. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Courts, Outer. No court shall be covered 
with roof or skylight. Width shall never be 
less than minimum required for inner court. 

Inner Courts. Minimum width, 10 ft. for 3 
story bldg's.; for each additional story width 
shall be increased 1 ft. Minimum area 200 
sq. ft. For every additional story an in¬ 
crease of 20 sq ft. is required. 

Lowell, Mass. 


3Ieitt<phis, Tenn. 

Court, Inner. When on lot line it shall 
have minimum width of 6 ft. and minimum 
area of 72 sq. ft. For every story over 4 
stories the court shall increase % ft. in width 
and 1 ft. in length. May decrease % ft. for 
each story under 4 and 10 sq. ft. deducted 
from area. When enclosed on 4 sides the 
least dimension shall be 12 ft. For every 
story above 4 least dimension shall be in¬ 
creased 1 ft. 

Courts, Outer. On lot line shall not be 
less than 4 ft. wide, for 4 story bldgs. For 


90 
































































COURTS —Cont’d 


every additional story width shall increase 
V 2 ft. When located betw. wings minimum 
width shall .be 8 ft. For 4 story bldg. V 2 ft. 
increased for each additional story. May de¬ 
crease 1 ft. for each story under 4. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

Inner courts. Shall not be less than 3 0 ft. 
wide nor less than 190 sq. ft. in area for 
courts 2 stories in height; for every addi¬ 
tional story the length and width shall be 
increased 1 ft. each. 

Outer courts. Shall not be less than 3 ft. 
for 2 story bldg. Width shall increase 1 ft. 
for each add. story. When situated between 
wings of same bldg, it shall not be less than 
8 ft. wide for 2 story bldg. For each addi¬ 
tional story it shall be increased 1 ft. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Courts, Outer. No court shall be covered 
by roof o<r skylight. Lot line courts shall be 
measured to lot line. Width of a one story 
court shall be 10 ft. and shall increase 2 ft. 
for each additional story. The length shall 
never be greater than four times the width. 

Inner Courts. Minimum width is the same 
as for outer courts. Area shall never be less 
than twice the square of the minimum widtn. 

New r Orleans, La. 

Inner courts. Courts shall be 16 ft. wide 
and 256 sq. ft. in area. Width to be increased 
2 ft. for every additional 10 ft. in height of 
building. 

Outer Court. For tenement 50 ft. high 
court must be 12 ft. wide, increased 2 ft. 
for every additional 10 ft. in height of build¬ 
ing. 

Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 

Inner courts. When one side is on inner lot 
line. Minimum width shall be 8 ft. when en¬ 
closed on all sides it shall be 24 ft. For 
every increase of 12 ft. in height above 50 ft. 
the width of such courts shall be increased 
1 ft. Outer Courts. Shall not be covered 


by roof or skylight. Minimum width when 
measured from lot line shall be 2 ft. 8 ft. 
for 4 story bldg. If the court is between 
windows its minimum width shall be 4 ft. If 
bldg, is over 65 ft. the width of court shall 
be increased 1 ft. for each 30 ft. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Courts inner. 

Shall have a least dimension of not less 
than 16 feet. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Inner courts shall be 10 ft. wide. Outer 
courts must be 10 ft. in width. 

Portland, Ore. 

Minimum width—6 feet. 

Providence, R. I. 

Richmond, Ya. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Court—Inner. When on inner lot line 
minimum dimensions for 60 feet building 
shall be 12x24. For every 12 feet of in¬ 
crease or decrease in height y 2 foot shall 
be added or subtracted. When enclosed on 
4 sides the minimum width shall be 24 feet; 
for every 12 feet increase or decrease in 
height 1 foot shall be added or subtracted. 

Courts—Outer. No court shall be covered. 
When on lot line court shall have minimum 
width of 6 feet for a building 60 feet high; 
For every 12 feet increase in height the 
court shall be increased y 2 foot in width; 
for every 12 feet decrease in height court 
width may be decreased V 2 foot. When lo¬ 
cated between wings—for a 60 foot building 
court shall be 12 feet wide; 1 foot shall be 
added or subtracted for 12 fee,t increase or 
decrease. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Inner courts. Courts shall be not less than 
6 ft. wide and 12 ft. long. Increased 6 
inches for every story above 4. 

Outer courts. Courts shall be not less 
than 4 ft. Increase 6 inches throughout en¬ 
tire height for every added story above 4. 


Seattle, Wash. 

Height of bldg. Width of court. 


1 

story 

5 

ft. 

9 

mJ 

stories 

6 

ft. 

3 

stories 

7 

ft. 

4 

stories 

8 

ft. 

5 

stories 

9 

ft. 

6 

stories 

10 

ft. 


2 ft. increase in width for each added story 
above the 6th. Area of each story above the 
3rd in non-fire proof tnmt. shall be 1% of 
lot area greater than area of courts of floor 
immediately below. Court when covered by 
skylight shall have width increased 25%. 
Outer Court. Width shall be 75% of width 
of “Interior Courts.” Court shall not be 
longer than 5 times the width. Court when 
covered by skylight shall have the minimum 
width increased 25%. 

Toledo, Ohio 


Toronto, Can. 


Washington, D. C. 

Inner courts. For bldg. 25 ft. in height 
width of court must be at least 5 ft. and 
area 65 sq. ft. 3 inches added to each dimen¬ 
sion for each foot of increased height. 

Outer courts. Court 25 ft. in height for 
bldg. 25 ft. high shall be 4% ft. in width; *4 
inch added for each additional foot of length. 
1 inch for each additional foot of height. 

Worcester, Mass. 

Outer Courts. Minimum width shall be q 
ft. when on lot line. Others shall be double 
this. For each additional story above 3 the 
width shall be increased 1 ft. Length shall 
not be greater than 2 times length unless 
provided with intake. 

Inner Courts. When on lot line minimum 
width shall be 7 ft. When enclosed on 4 
sides it shall be double this. For each ad¬ 
ditional story above 3, width shall be in¬ 
creased 1 ft. 


Baltimore, Md. 

For tenement over 2 stories intake must 
be 2% ft. by 6% ft. If area of inner court 
of tenement exceeds 340 sq. ft. intake must 
be 5% of court area. 

Boston, Mass. 

Must be 3 ft. wide by 7 ft. high. Must 
open on street yard or alley. 

_Bridgeport, Conn._ 

Calgary, Can. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Inner courts shall have at least one air 
intake, connecting bottom with street, yard, 
or alley; it shall be 3 ft. wide by 7 ft. high. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Must connect with street, alley, yard or 
court, and be at least 3 percent of size of vent 
shaft and at least 100 sq. inches in area. 

_ Cincinnati, Ohio _ 

Columbus, Ohio 

Inner courts extending through two stor¬ 
ies shall have horizontal air intake at bot¬ 
tom. It must be 3 ft. wide by 7 ft. high. 

_ Dayton, Ohio 

Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Courts extending more than 1 story shall 
have horizontal intake at bottom. It shall 
be 3 ft. wide and 7 ft. high and must com¬ 
municate with street or yard. 

Duluth, Minn._ 


INTAKES 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Every inner court shall have 2 or more 
horizontal intakes at bottom. They shall not 
be less than 3 by 7. One shall open on court, 
yard, alley or street. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Inner courts shall be provided with hori- 
zonal intakes; it shall communicate with 
street, yard or alley and be not less than 
35 ft. in area in cross section. 

Lowell, Mass. 

Mem,phis, Tenn. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

Inner courts shall have intake for fresh 
air leading from court or yard. It shall 
equal one thousandth of the cubic feet con¬ 
tained in court. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Inner courts shall have one or more hori¬ 
zontal air intakes at bottom. One shall lead 
directly to street, front or rear yard. 

New’ Orleans, La. 

In vent courts intake shall not be less than 
4 sq. ft., in other inner courts not less than 
3 ft. wide and 7 ft. high. Shall be approved 
by City Engineer. 

Omaha , Neb. 

Paterson, N. «L 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Inner courts shall be connected directly 
with street, yard, alley or outer court by a 
ground passageway; it shall be at least 4 
feet wide and 8 feet high and shall be kept 


free from obstructions of any kind. Bot¬ 
toms shall be adequately drained and paved 
with cement or concrete. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Intakes open into street or yard. 

Portland, Ore. 

Providence, R. I. 

Richmond, Va. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Inner courts and vent shafts shall have 
such access as will enable them to be clean¬ 
ed out. 

St. Paul, Minn. 


Seattle, Wash. 

Interior or party line courts unless hav¬ 
ing 50% greater area than required must 
have a vent duct equal in area to 5% of the 
area of the court, except in bldgs, not over 
3 stories high. 

_ Toledo, Ohio 


Toronto, Can. 

Washington, D. C. 

Every inner court shall have one or more 
horizontal intakes at the bottom and con¬ 
necting directly with street or yard with the 
area of 10% of cross section of area of court. 

Worcester, Mass, 

Inner courts shall have one or more hori¬ 
zontal air intakes. It shall be 3 ft. wide 
and 7 ft. high and communicate with street, 
yard or alley. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Air and vent shafts shall be from 3 to 10 
ft. wide, with area from 14 to 163 sq. ft. 
For tnmts. 2 to 10 stories high according to 
schedule. 

Boston, Mass. 

Shall be not less than 15 sq. ft. in area,, 
and not less than 3 ft. in least dimension for 
buildings 50 ft. high; for every increase of 
10 ft. in height the least dimension shall be 
increased 1 ft. and area not less than 8 sq. ft. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, Mass. 

Shall have metal skylight with openings 
on all sides under skylight. For 3 story 
buildings the minimum width shall be 3 ft. 
and area 15 feet. For each additional story 
the width shall be increased by 1 foot and 
area by five feet. 

Chicago, Ill. 


Height 

Width 

Area 


1 story 

3 feet 

21 

sq. 

ft 

2 stories 

3 feet 

22 y 2 

sq. 

ft 

3 stories 

3 feet 

27 

sq. 

ft 

4 stories 

3 feet 

36 

sq. 

ft 

5 stories 

5 feet 

48 

sq. 

ft 

6 stories 

6 feet 

72 

sq. 

ft 


VENT SHAFTS 

Height Width Area 

7 stories 8 feet 96 sq. ft 

8 or more 8 feet 120 sq. ft 

_Cincinnati, Ohio_ 

Columbus, Ohio _ 

_ Dayton, Ohio _ 

_Denver, Colo._ 

_ Duluth, Minn. _ 

_ Indianapolis, Ind. _ 

Louisville, Ky. 

Lowell, Mass. 

Memphis, Tenn. 

Least dimension shall not oe less than 3 ft. 
Shall not be less than 12 sq. ft. in area. Shall 
be increased 2 sq. ft. in area for each addi¬ 
tional story over 4. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

Prohibited except for purpose of lighting 
or ventilating water closet. 

Minnea polis, M inn*_ 

New’ Orleans, La.__ 


Omaha, Neb. 

Paterson, N. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Shall have a dimension of not less than 
5 feet. The passage way shall be con¬ 
structed the same manner required for 
courts, except it need be only 2 V 2 feet wide 
by 6 feet high. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Portland, Ore. 


Providence, R. I. 


Richmond, Va. 


Rochester, N. Y. 

Minimum dimension 4 feet. Minimum area 
20 feet. For each 12 feet increase in height 
3 square feet shall be added; for a similar 
decrease 3 square feet may be subtracted. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

For 4 story tenements shafts shall not be 
less than 12 sq. ft. in area. Least dimension 
3 ft. Increase 2 sq. ft. for each additional 
story and uniform throughout. 

__Seattle, Wash. 


91 







































































VENT SHAFTS—Cont'd 

Toledo, Ohio Toronto, Can. Worcester, 31ass. 

For 3 story tenements shafts shall not he Shall not be roofed over. Least dimension 

less than 40 sq. ft. 4 stories, not less than shall be 3 ft. minimum area 12 sq. ft. For 

50 sq. ft. 10 sq. ft. additional for each ad- Washington, D. C. each story less than 4 minimum area may 

ditional story -be decreased 1 sq. ft. 


Baltimore, Md. 

One room shall be 120 sq. ft., others 70 
sq. ft. 

Boston, 3Iass. 

One room shall have at least 120 sq. ft. of 
lloor area. Other rooms shall have at least 
90 sq. ft. of floor area. Each room shall be 
at least 8% ft. high. 

_Bridgeport, Conn.___ 

Calgary, Can, 

Cambridge, Mass. 

One room with 150 sq. ft. of floor area ex¬ 
cept water closets and ibath rooms. Not 
more than one with less than 80 sq. ft. and 
none less than 63 sq. ft. No room, except 
water closet and bath rooms, shall be less 
than 7 ft. wide and Sy 2 ft. high. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Minimum area of one room shall be 120 sq. 
ft. others 80 sq. ft. except that those having 
a window not less than 18 sq. ft. in area 
opening on street can be 70 sq. ft. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

One room—120 sq. ft. floor area. All 
spaces less than 70 sq. ft. in area shall be 
considered closets otr alcoves. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Same as Model Law except rooms shall be 
only 8% ft. high. 

Dayton, Ohio 

One room with 120 sq. ft. of floor area. 
Other rooms 70 sq. ft. of floor area. 


R003IS—AREA 

Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

One room in tenements must contain 150 
sq. ft. of floor area. Kitchenettes 50 sq. ft. of 
floor area. All others, except bath rooms and 
water closet compartments, 80 sq. ft. of floor 
area. No room except kitchenettes shall be 
less than 7 ft. wide, no room less than 8 ft. 
and 6 inches high. 

Duluth. 3iinn. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Same as Model Law. 

Louisville, Ky. 

One room 150 sq. ft. of floor area, others 
84 isq. ft. of floor area. 

Lowell, 3iass. 

3Iem,phis, Tenn. 

One room, 120 sq. ft. in floor area. Other 
rooms, 70 sq. ft. in floor area. 

31ilwaiikee, Wis. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

In two family and multiple dwellings every 
room shall contain at least 100 sq. ft. of floor 
area. No room shall be less than 7 ft. wide. 
This does not apply to kitchenettes or sleep¬ 
ing porches. Two family dwellings must be 
8 it. high; multiple dwellings 8 V 2 ft. high. 

New Orleans, La. 

One room 120 sq. ft.; others except water 
closets and bath rooms 100 sq. ft. 

Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 

One room shall have a minimum floor area 
of 120 sq. ft.; other rooms 70 sq. ft. No 
rooms shall be less than 9 ft. high. 

Pennsylvania (3Iodel Law). 

Each apartment shall have at least one 
room with 150 square feet of floor area; 
every other room shall have not less than 
100 square feet of floor area. 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, 

Ore. 


Providence, 

R. 

I. 

One room shall not be 

less 

than 120 sq. ft. 

in area. Other rooms 70 

sq. 

ft. 

Richmond, 

, Va. 



Rochester, N. Y. 

One .room 120 square feet floor area. 

Others 70 square feet floor area. 

St. Paul, 3Iinn. 

One room shall be 120 sq. ft. floor area, all 
others 70 sq. ft. 

Seattle, Wash. 

One room shall be at least 120 sq. ft. in 
area, others 80 sq. ft. except kitchen, toilet, 
etc. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Toronto, Can. 

One room shall have not less than 120 sq. 
ft. of area, all others at least 100 sq. ft. 

Washington, D. C. 

Worcester, 3Iass. 

One room—120 sq. ft. of floor area. 

Others 90 sq. ft. of floor area. 


R003IS—HEIGHT 


Baltimore, 3fd. 

Cellar rooms shall be 8 ft. in clear, others 
9 ft. 


Boston, 3Iass. 


Bridgeport, Conn. 


Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, 3Iass. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Rooms shall be 8 V 2 ft. in height. Attic 
rooms same in % area. 


Cincinnati, Ohio 

No room shall be less than 8 ft. in height. 


than 8 ft. 6 inches high from the finished 
floor to finished ceiling. 

_Duluth, 31inn._ 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Height of rooms must be 9 ft. 

Lowell, 3Iass. 

31eni,phis, Tenn. 

Height shall be 9 feet. 

_31ilwaukee, Wis._ 

Minneapolis, 3Iinn. 


C olu mbus, Ohio 
Dayton, Ohio 


New’ Orleans, La. 

Rooms shall be not less than Sy 2 ft. high. 
Attic rooms in but one-half. 


Denver, Colo. 


Omaha, Neb. 


Detroit, 3IIeh. 

Rooms must be 8 ft. 6 in. except attic rooms 
in one and two family houses need be 8 ft. 
6 inches in but y 2 of area, but at no point less 
than 6 feet in height. No room in tenement 
hereafter erected shall be in any part less 


Paterson, N. J. 

No room shall be less than 9 ft high. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

No room shall be less than 9 feet high, 
from floor covering to ceiling. 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Rooms shall be 8 ft high except attic rooms 
in but one-half of area. 

•Portland, Ore. 


Providence, R. I. 

Rooms shall be 8 y 2 ft. high except attic 
rooms shall be 8 ft. in but one-half of area. 

Richmond, Va. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

All rooms shall be 9 feet high. 

St. Paul, 3Iinn, 

Rooms shall be 9 ft. high except attic rooms 
in 'but y 2 of area. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Rooms must be 8 ft. 4 inches high. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Rooms shall be 8 ft. high except attic 
rooms may average 8 ft. high. 

Toronto, Can. 

'Rooms shall be 8% ft. high except attic 
rooms in but one half area. 

Worcester, Mass. 


Baltimore, 3Id. 

Window area shall be one half of floor area. 

Boston, 3Iass. 

Window area shall equal one-eighth of 
floor area. Windows shall open on street, 
yard or court. 

_Bridgeport, Conn._ 

Calgary, Can. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Area of windows shall equal one eighth of 
floor area, opening on street, yard or court. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Window area shall be one tenth of floor 
area. Eac window shall be 10 sq. ft. in area 
and top 7 ft. above floor. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Window area shall equal one-tenth of floor 
area but never less than 12 sq. ft. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Each room shall have a window or win¬ 
dows of not less than 12 sq. ft. in area 
opening on street, yard or court. Total win¬ 
dow area shall equal y 8 of floor area. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Windows shall open into street, yard, or 
court. Window area of each room shall 
equal one-tenth of floor area. 

_ Denver, Colo. _ 

Detroit, 3Iich. 

Shall equal one-eight of floor area. At 
least one window must 'be at least 12 sq. ft. 
in area. In tenements the top of at least 
one window shall not be less than 7 ft. 6 in. 
above the floor. 


ROOMS—WINDOWS 
Duluth, 3Iinn. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

All rooms, including water closet and bath, 
shall have window area equal to one-seventh 
of floor area. 

Louisville, Ky. 

All rooms, including water closets and bath 
rooms shall have window area equal to one- 
tenth of floor area. No window shall be less 
than 12 sq. ft. 

Lowell, Mass, 


3Ienr,phis, Tenn. 

Every room except water closet or bath, 
shall have window opening on street, yard or 
court. Window area shall equal one-tenth of 
floor area. 

3Iilwaukee, Wis. 

Shall have at least one window opening on 
street, yard or court. Window area shall 
equal one-tenth of floor area. 

3Iinneapolis, Minn. 

Each room shall have window opening on 
street, yard or court and so placed as to light 
all portions of room. Window area in each 
room shall equal y 8 of floor area. At least 
one window shall be 12 sq. ft. between stop- 
heads. 

New Orleans, La. 

Window area shall be one-sixth of floor 
area. Windows shall be located so as to prop¬ 
erly light all parts of room. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Shall have one window opening on street, 
yard or court. Window area shall equal 
one-tenth of floor space. 


Pennsylvania (3Iodel Law). 

Every living room shall have windows 
equal to one-tenth of its floor area but 
never less than 12 square feet opening on 
street, yard, alley or court. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Window area shall be one-tenth of floor 
area. 

Portland, Ore. 

Windows shall be one-tenth of floor area 
if they open on a space 30 ft. or more in 
width; if open space is less than this they 
shall be one-eighth of floor area. 

Providence, R. I. 

Window area shall be one-tenth of floor 
area except bath rooms, etc. One window 
shall open to external air. 

Richmond, Va. 

Shall have one room opening on street, 
yard or alley. 

_ Rochester, N, Y ._ 

St. Paul, 3Iinn. 

Windows area shall be l-10th of floor area. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Window area shall be y 8 of floor area. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Window area shall be one-tenth the floor 
area. 

Toronto, Can. 

Window area shall be one-tenth the floor 
area. 

Washington, D. C. 

Worcester, Mass. 

Area .shall equal y 8 of floor area and shall 
open on street, yard or court. 


92 

























































BUILDINGS ON SAME LOT 


Baltimore, Md. 

If lower tenement is one story, space be¬ 
tween must be 10 ft. wide, if lower tenement 
is 2 stories 15 ft., if 3 stories 20 ft. and 4 stor¬ 
ies, 25 ft. 

Boston, Mass. 


Bridgeport, Conn. 


Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, Mass. 

One building- shall not be built nearer than 
10 ft. to any other building on the same lot, 
unless the wall of such building is construct¬ 
ed as party wall. Party wall shall be fire 
proof. No building shall be built nearer than 
5 ft. to the lot line unless built as party wall. 

Chicago, Ill. 

For one story tenement space between must 
be 10 ft.; 5 ft. more for each added story. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 


Columbus, Ohio 


Dayton, Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 


Detroit, Mich. 


Duluth, Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

[Space between shall be 25 ft.; for 4 story 
buildings it shall be 30 ft. and for each ad¬ 
ditional story such §pace shall be increased 
3 ft. 


Louisville, Ky. 

For bldgs. 50 ft. in height, space snail be 24 
ft., for every increase of 12 rt. in height the 
space -shall be increased by 2 ft. 

Lowell, Mass. 

Memphis, Tenn. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Space between such bldgs, shall conform to 
regulations for side yards. 

New Orleans, La. 

No building shall be erected that will de¬ 
crease the minimum depth of yards or size 
of courts as prescribed. 

Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Shall be at least 16 feet apart. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Portland, Ore. 

Providence, R. I. 

Richmond, Ya. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Open space shall be 24 feet deep for build¬ 
ings 60 feet in height; for every increase of 
12 feet in height, the open space shall in¬ 
crease 1 foot in depth; and for a correspond¬ 
ing decrease below 60 feet the space may 
be decreased one foot. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

If any building is hereafter placed on the 
same lot with a tenement house or an apart¬ 


ment house, the space between said building 
shall always be of such size and arranged 
in such manner as is prescribed for yards 
in rear of apartment houses and tenement 
houses and no building of any kind shall 
be hereafter placed on the same lot with a 
tenement house or an apartment house so 
as to decrease the minimum size of courts 
or yards as hereinbefore prescribed, and if 
any tenement house or apartment house is 
hereafter erected upon any lot upon which 
there is already another building, it shall 
comply with all the provisions of this sec¬ 
tion, and in addition, the space between the 
said building and the said tenement house or 
apartment house shall be of such size and 
arranged in such manner as is prescribed in 
this section for inner courts, the height of 
the highest building on the lot to regulate 
the dimensions. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Each bldg, shall be provided with the re¬ 
quired yards and courts and shall comply 
with the requirements of the law for each 
such bldg when placed alone upon lot. 

Toledo, Ohio 


Toronto, Can. 


Washington, )D. C. 

Fire proof shafts not over 12 ft. high may 
be built if space between house and shaft 
equal the height of the shed. Space between 
bldg, on street and rear bldgs, must be 
equal to the sum of the rear yards computed 
independently. 

Worcester, 3Iass. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Same requirements for alcoves as for other 
rooms. 

Boston, Mass. 

Shall have an opening into room equal to 
80 per cent of that side of alcove, and shall 
have window area of 15 sq. ft. Must con¬ 
form to requirements for other rooms as 
regards area. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

_Calgary, Can._ 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Same requirements for alcoves as for other 
rooms unless it has opening of 20 percent 
of its entire wall surface. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Shall have an opening not less than 6 ft. 
wide from floor to top of windows. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Same as Model 'Law. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Shall have window or opening into ad¬ 
joining room equal to 20 per cent of its 
wall area. 

Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Shall be separately lighted and ventilated. 
Shall not be less than 80 sq. ft. in area. No 
part of any room shall be enclosed in any 
way unless* separately lighted and ventilated 
and containing a floor area of not less than 80 
sq. ft. 


Baltimore, 3Id. 

Water closets shall be 2 ft. 4 inches wide. 

_ Boston. 31ass. _ 

_ Bridgeport, Conn. _ 

_ Calgary, Can. _ 

_ Cambridge. Mass. _ 

_ Chicago, HI. _ 

Cincinnati, Ohi o _ 

Columbus, Ohio __ 

Dayton, O hio _ 

Denver, Colo. __ 

Detroit, 31ieh. 

Duluth, 3Iinn. 

Waterclosets shall be at least three feet 
wide and enclosed in plaster partitions. 


ALCOVES 

Duluth. 3Iinn. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Same as Model Law. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Must comply with requirements for other 
rooms; except an alcove may have a floor area 
of less than 35 ft. if it has an opening into 
an adjoining room equal to 20% of its total 
wall area. 

Lowell, 3Iass. 

31em.phis, Tenn. 

3Iilwaukee, Wis. 

3Iinneapolis, Minn. 

Shall conform to requirements for other 
rooms. 

New* Orleans, La. 

An alcove shall have an opening equal to 
80 percent of side on which opening is and 
one window. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Must conform to requirements for other 
rooms. 

Pennsylvania (3Iodel Law). 

Shall be separately lighted and ventilated 
and shall be not less than 90 square feet in 
area. No part of a room shall be enclosed 
unless it is properly lighted and ventilated 
and has an area of not less than 100 square 
feet. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Same requirements for alcove as for rooms 
unless 20 percent of its entire wall surface 
opens to habitable rooms. 


WATER CLOSET AREA 
Indianapolis. Ind. 
Louisville, Ky. 
Lowell, Mass. 


3Ienr.nhis, Tenn. 
3Iilwaukee, Wis. 
31inneapolis, 3Iinn. 
New Orleans, La. 
Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 


Pennsylvania (3Iodel Law). 

Each apartment shall have a separate 
water closet in a separate compartment; it 
shall not be less than 3 feet wide and shall 
be enclosed with plastered partitions, which 
shall extend to the ceiling. 


Portland, Ore. 

Shall have opening into adjoining room 
equal to the width of room, but never less 
than twice the width of the door of an in¬ 
terior room. When such room has but one 
door, alcove shall have a window area equal 
to one-tenth of flopr area. 

Providence, R. I. 

Alcove must conform to all requirements 
for other rooms. 

Rich moil d, Ya. 


Rochester, N. Y. 

Must conform to requirements for other 
rooms. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

An alcove room is to be considered a 
part of adjoining room. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Alcoves shall have a permanent opening 
into another room equal to 75% of floor 
area unless floor and window area are equal 
to that required elsewhere. 

Toledo, Ohio 


Toronto, Can. 


Washington, D. C. 

Alcoves are prohibited. 

Worcester, 3Iass. 

Shall have floor area of not less than 70 
sq. ft.; shall be separately lighted and ven¬ 
tilated as provided for other rooms. 


Pittsburgh. Pa. 
Portland, Ore. 
Providence, R. I. 
Richmond, Ya. 


Rochester, N. Y. 

Shall be not less than 2 feet 4 inches wide. 

St. Paul, Minn. 


Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 


Toronto, Can. 


Washington, D. C. 


Worcester, 3Iass. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Window areas shall be 3 sq. ft. 

Boston, 3Iass. 

Shall have at least one window, at least 
1 ft. !by 3, opening on street, yard, vent 
shaft or court. 

Bridge port, Conn. __ 

Calgary, Can. 

Windows shall be at least 3 ft. sq. in area 
opening directly upon a street, yard, or vent 
shaft. 


WATER CLOSET—WINDOW AREA 
Cambridge, Mass. 

Shall have one window opening on street, 
yard or court. Shall have at least sq. ft. of 
window area. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Window must be 6 sq. ft. in area and at 
least one ft. wide. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Each compartment shall have a window 
area of not less than 3 sq. ft. and shall open 
on a street, yard, court or shaft. 


Columbus, Ohio 


Dayton, Ohio 

Denver, Colo. 

Shall 
street, 
than 3 

Detroit, 3Iich. 

have at least one window opening on 
yard or court. It shall not be less 
sq. ft. between stop heads. 


Duluth, 3Iinn. 


93 































































































WATER CLOSET—WINDOW AREA —Cont'd 


I ltdianapolis, Iml, 
Louisville, Ky. 
Lowell, Mass. 


Memphis, Tenn. 

Minimum window area shall be 3 sq. ft. 

Milwaukee. AVIs. 

All water closets shall have at least one 
window at least 3 sq. ft. in area opening on 
a street, yard, court or vent shaft. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Each water closet shall have at least one 
window opening on street, yard or court. 
Window area must be not less than 6 sq. ft. 
between stopheads; in multiple dwellings one 
of such windows shall be not less than 3 sq. 
ft. between stopheads. 

New Orleans, La. 

Window or skylight area shall not be less 
than 3 sq. ft. 

Omaha, Nell. 


Paterson, N. J. 

Area shall not be less than 3 sq. ft. No 
window shall be less than 1 ft. wide. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Shall have a window area opening directly 
on street, yard, or alley. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Water closets shall have windows of suffici¬ 
ent size. Approved by Bureau of Health. 

Portland, Ore. 

All such rooms shall contain at lease 3 sq. 
ft. of window area. This window area shall 
be increased by 1 ft. for every additional 
toilet fixture in excess of three. 


St. Paul, Minn. 

Window area of water closets shall be 3 
sq. ft. and no window shall be less than 1 ft. 
in width unless approved by Commissioner 
of Public Works. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Windows shall ‘be 1 ft. wide and 432 sq. 
inches area and at least *4 of floor area. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Must have window opening to outer air 
or vent shaft not less than 10 sq. ft. where 
practical. 

Toronto, Can. 


Providence, R. I. 

Windows shall be 3 sq. ft. in area and not 
less than one ft. in width. 

Richmond, V«. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Shall have window opening on street, yard, 
court or vent shaft; it shall be at least 1 
foot by 3 feet. 


AVn.shing'ton, D, C. 

Window area shall be 1-10 area of floor, 
and no window less than 4 sq. ft. 

AVorcester, Mass. 

Shall have window containing at least 6 
sq. ft. of glass, opening on street, yard or 
court. 


SANITARY PROA’ISIONS 


HABITABLE ROOMS 


Baltimore, Aid. 

See Light and Ventilation, General Pro¬ 
visions. 

Boston, AIwss. 

Bridgeport, Conn, 

Calgary, Can. 

Cambridge, Alass. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Every room must have window to street, 
yard or court, with minimum area 1/10 of 
floor area, top 7*4 ft. aibove floor. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 


Colnmlnis, Ohio 


Dayton, Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 


Detroit, Alich. 


Duluth, Alinn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Infected and uninhabitable houses to be va¬ 
cated upon order of Board of Health. 

Louisville, Ky. _ 


Lowell. Al ass. 
Alein.phis, Tenn. 
Alilwankee. AA r is. 
Minneapolis, AHnn. 
New Orleans, La. 
Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 


Pennsylvania (Alodel Law). 

When any building or any part is unfit for 
habitation for any reason, the Board of 
Health shall order such rooms vacated. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Habitable rooms shall have 700 cu. ft. of 
air, shall be 8*4 ft. in height except attic 
rooms in but one-half and a window area 
equal to 1/10 of floor area. 


Portland. Ore. 
Providence, II. I. 


Richmond, A a. 
Rochester. Tt, A~. 


St. Paul, Alinn. 

Habitable rooms must have outside win¬ 
dows. 


Seattle, AA ash. 

Rooms shall be 8 ft. 4 inches in height. 


Toledo, Ohio 

Rooms must be 8 ft. high and have win¬ 
dows opening to external air equal to 10% 
of floor area or into another room with win¬ 
dow area equal to 20% floor area. Top of 
one window must be 7 feet above the floor. 


Toronto, Can. 

Habitable rooms shall be of area specified 
under “Light and Ventilation, Area of 
Rooms.’’ 

AA'ashington, D. C. 


AVorcester. Alass, 


CELLARS AND BASEAIENTS. CONDITIONS OF OCCUPANCY 


Baltimore, Aid. 

Floors must be of concrete 4 inches thick; 
ceilings must be 4*4 ft. above ground; must 
have open areaway 2% ft. wide in front of 
windows; rooms must be 8 ft. in height; 
and there must 'be separate water closets; 
walls must be damp proof. 

Boston, Alass. 

As good as Model Law. Elaborate details 
regarding habitation of basement rooms. 

Bridgeport. Conn. _ 

Calgary, Can. 

Basement cannot be used for living rooms, 
except for janitor unless ceiling is at least 
6 ft. above grade level. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Prohibited. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Living in cellar prohibited. Basement 
rooms must be 8% ft. high; one-half above 
grade; 4% ft. above street grade; have separ¬ 
ate water closet and water proof floors. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Basement must conform to following pro¬ 
visions; rooms must be 7*4 ft. high in exist¬ 
ing tenements and 8 ft. high in those here¬ 
after erected; outside there must be an 
open air space 2*4 ft. wide, of every portion 
occupied and along entire street frontage; 
its bottom must be *4 ft. below floor level 
of basement and properly drained, top must 
be covered with iron grating. Floors and 
walls must be damp proof. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Prohibited except for cooking and laundry. 
Permitted in case of tenements prior erected 
with special permit from Health Dept. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Sleeping in basement prohibited except in 
case of janitor. Other rooms may be in 
basement if within 30 ft. of the street; all 
windows shall have stationary .sash, all ex¬ 
terior entrances shall have vestibules with 
2 doors and no open areas shall connect 
directly with the rooms. 

Denver, Colo ._ _ _ 

Detroit, Alich. 

Prohibited in cellars. Permitted in base¬ 
ments if in addition to other requirements of 
this code it shall be well drained and dry and 
properly lighted and ventilated. 


Dnlutli, Alinn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Basements shall not be occupied unless 
rooms are at least 9 ft. high; unless ceiling is 
4*4 ft. above the yard grade; unless there 
shall be a separate water closet compartment; 
unless window area equals one-seventh of 
room area and one window equals 12 sq. ft. 
between stopheads; unless all walls are 
damp proof. 

Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Alass. 


Alein.phis, Tenn. 

Prohibited. 

Alilwankee, AA 7 is. 

May be used provided that rooms are 8 ft. 
high; that ceiling is 4 ft. above the lot; that 
window area is 1-10 of floor area and that 
they face on street, yard or court, and that 
walls shall be damp proof and water proof. 

Alinneapolis, Alinn. 

Cellars shall not be inhabited. Basement 
rooms shall not be occupied except by janitor. 
They shall have sufficient light and ventila¬ 
tion, be kept dry and conform to other re¬ 
quirements of this act. In bldgs, erected 
prior it shall not be occupied without written 
permit from Commissioner of Health; it shall 
be 7 ft. high; shall have water closet; shall 
be damp proof; and adequately lighted and 
ventilated. 

New Orleans, La. 

Basements may not be occupied for living 
purposes unless* the room is 8*4 ft. high. 
Must have separate water closet; total win¬ 
dow area 1/6 floor area; opening upon street 
or yard, and the walls must be damp proof 
snd water proof. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Rooms shall be at least 7,*4 ft. in clear 
and have not more than 4 ft. 8 inches below 
the grade. Windows shall open on street, 
yard or court, and if they front solely on 
street they shall be 3 ft. back from lot line; 
if ceiling is less than 8*4 ft. in the clear, 
window area shall be 15% of floor area. 

Paterson, N. J. 


Pennsylvania (Alodel Law). 

No cellar room shall be occupied for living,® 
purposes. Basement rooms shall not be useduj 
for sleeping purposes, but may be for otherg 
purposes if they are free from dampness. 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Living in cellar is prohibited. Basement 
rooms must be 8*4 ft. high; *4 above grade; 
windows *4 floor area with one-half of sash 
made to open full width and top within 6 in. 
of ceiling; water closet appurtenant to every 
apartment and every room must have a win¬ 
dow opening on a street, yard or court of not 
less than 100 sq. ft. 

Portland, Ore. 

When used for habitation rooms shall be 
8*4 ft. high except for use of janitor which 
need be only 8 ft. One-third of room shall 
be above street grade, and shall have water 
closet. 

Providence, R. I. 


Richmond, A r a. 


Rochester, N. A'. 

May be occupied by janitor and family 
provided that each room is '9 fe'et high, that 
ceiling is 4*4 feet above the curb, that each 
room has a window opening on street or 
yard, and the total window area is % of 
floor area, that each room’ shall be damp 
proof and that it shall be provided with a 
water closet. 

St. Paul, Alinn. 

'Cellar may not be occupied for living pur¬ 
poses unless rooms are 8 ft. high; ceilings 
2*4 ft. above street level; windows opening 
on street or open courts equal to *4 of 
floor area; use of separate water closet; and 
walls must be damp proof. 

Seattle, AA’asli. 

Occupancy prohibited unless not more 
than % of height is below grade level and 
total window area is 1-10 of floor area; walls 
must be damp proof and water proof; must 
meet with approval of the Supt. of Buildings. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Rooms must be 8 ft. high; ceilings 4 ft. 
above grade; must be properly drained and 
ventilated; and each apt. must have 9 sq. ft. 
of glass per 100 sq. ft. floor area. 

Toronto, Can. 


AA’ashington, D, C. 


AA’orcester, Alans. 

Prohibited in cellars. Basements when 
used for habitation shall have ceiling 4% 
ft. above grade, be damp proof and conform 
to other requirements of this act. 


94 














































































CELLAR FLOORS 


Baltimore, Mil. 

Must be of concrete four inches thick with 
a top finish of mortar one inch thick. 

Boston, Mass. 

Shall have floor of concrete, cement and 
gravel, tar and gravel, by asphalt, or by 
bricks. All cellars must 'be water proof and 
damp proof. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 


Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, Mass. 

Every dwelling shall have a basement, 
cellar or excavated space at least 3 ft. deep, 
or building shall 'be elevated 3 ft. Space 
shall be lighted and ventilated and properly 
drained. When necessary to keep floor dry, 
the walls shall be water proof. 

Chicago, III. 

Must be of Portland cement concrete three 
inches thick. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Shall be properly ventilated by windows 
or vent flues. 

Columbus, Ohio 

House shall be 2 ft. above grade. Cellars 
shall be properly lighted and ventilated. 

Dayton, Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 


Detroit, Mich. 

Every dwelling shall have a cellar or base¬ 
ment or excavated space 3 ft. deep or elevated 
2 ft. Walls shall be damp proof and water 
proof, and it shall be properly ventilated. 

__ Dnliitli, Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Shall have cellar at least 3 ft. deep. Shall 
be damp proof and properly lighted and ven¬ 
tilated. When necessary to prevent spread 
of damp air, the cellar floor shall be covered 
with concrete. 

Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Memphis, Tenn. 

Shall be damp proof and water proof. 

Milwaukee. Wis. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Every tenement shall have cellar, basement 
or excavated space under entire floor at least 
3 ft. deep or shall be elevated 3 ft. It shall 
be enclosed, properly ventilated and drained. 
When necessary wall shall be damp proof. 

New Orleans, La. 

Must be damp proof and water proof. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Walls and floor must be plastered on out¬ 
side with Portland cement below the ground 
level and they shall be laid in cement mortar. 


Shall have a cement floor not less than 3 in. 
thick laid on 6 inches of sand or cinders. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Floors shall be covered with 4 inches of 
concrete. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Shall be covered with cement or concrete. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Must be damp proof and water proof! 

Portland, Ore. 


Providence. R. I. 


Richmond, Va. 


Rochester, N. Y. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Must be damp proof and water proof. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Must be damp proof and water proof. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Toronto, Can. 

Washington, D. C. 

Shall be of cement 4 inches thick or con¬ 
crete 2 inches thick, or paved with hard 
brick laid in cement. Woodwork shall be 6 
inches clear of ground. 

Worcester, Mass. 


WATER SUPPLY 


Baltimore, Md. 

Every apartment must have sink with 
running water. 

Boston, Mass. 

Sink with running water required in each 
apartment in tenements prior erected one 
or more places required on each floor. 

Bridgeport, Conn, 

Calgary, Can. 

If there is a water main in the street on 
which a building fronts, it must be con¬ 
nected. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Sink required in each apartment. 

Chicago, III. 

There must be sink and running water foi 
each apartment. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Shall be a sink with running water in each 
apartment. In tenements prior erected there 
shall be a sink for every 2 apartments. 

Columbus, Ohio 


Dayton, Ohio 

Sink with running water required in each 
apt. 


Denver, Colo. 


Detroit, Mich. 

Sink and running water required in every 
apartment. 

Duluth, Minn. 

Every apartment must have sink and run¬ 
ning water. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Each apartment shall have sink with run¬ 
ning water, provided sewer is within 100 
ft. of water main. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Lowell. Mass. 


Mem,phis, Tenn. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

If city water is accessible and one or more 
places shall be provided on each floor. If 
city water is not accessible wholesome water 
shall be provided on lot and be kept free 
from contamination. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Sink shall be provided for each apartment. 

New Orleans, La. 

There must be proper sink with running 
water in each apartment. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Paterson, N. J. 

One sink with running water required in 
each apt. if water is accessible. When sup¬ 
ply comes from well it shall be subject to 
test from Board of Health. 


supply that is satisfactory to the Board of 
Health. In each apartment there shall be at 
least one kitchen sink. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

In tenement where it is possible to connect 
with water main, there shall be one sink for 
for every suite of rooms. 

Portland, Ore. 

Required at one oir more places on each 
floor. Owner shall provide tanks, pumps 
or other appliances to receive and distribute 
water. Tenements hereafter erected shall 
have sink in each apartment. Those prior 
erected shall have one on each floor, acces¬ 
sible without passing through another 
apartment. 

Providence, R. I. 


Richmond, Va. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Sink with running water required in every 
apartment. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Toledo, Ohio 


Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Tenements within 100 feet of water main 
shall be provided with plumbing system and 
connection with such water main; until such 
time no tenement shall be occupied, unless 
it has a private sewer system and water 


Toronto, Can, 


Washington, D. C. 

There shall be water supply in each apart¬ 
ment. 


Worcester, Mass. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Every apartment must have a separate 
water closet in separate compartment. 
There must be separate water closet for each 
family. 

Boston, Mass. 

Same as Model Law except apartments of 
less than 4 rooms may have water closet for 
every 3 rooms; and a general toilet room 
may be maintained in addition. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Shall be a water closet for every apart¬ 
ment of 3 rooms; and one for every 2 apart¬ 
ments of less than 3 rooms. 

Calgary, Can. 

There shall be separate water closet ac¬ 
commodations for every famliy or suite. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Same as Model Law except general toilet 
room may be provided in addition to required 
water closet. 

Chicago, III. 

There shall be separate water closet for 
each apartment except where apartment con¬ 
tains only two rooms, when there must be 
water closet for every two apartments. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Same as Model Law, except there may be 
one water closet for 2 apartments if the 
aggregate number of rooms does not ex¬ 
ceed 3; and if it is adjacent to each apart¬ 
ment and is accessible to each without pass¬ 
ing through another apartment. In existing 
tenement houses there shall be one water 
closet for every 2 apartments. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Same as Model Law. 


WATER CLOSET ACCOMMODATIONS 

Dayton, Ohio 

Shall be provided in each apt. in bath room 
or separate compartment. It shall not open 
on kitchen or dining room. 

Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Same as Model Law except general toilet 
room may be provided in addition to other 
requirements. 

Duluth, Minn. 

There shall be one water closet in separate 
compartment for each apartment. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

See Model Law. In houses prior erected 
there shall be a water closet for every two 
families. 

Louisville, Ky. _ 

Lowell, Mass. 

Mem,phis, Tenn. 

Same as Model Law except where apart¬ 
ments consists of but one or two rooms there 
may be but one water closet to every three 
rooms. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

One water closet required for every apt. 
in a separate compartment. Where apts. 
consist of only one or two rooms, one water 
closet may be provided for every two. In 
tenements prior erected one water closet is 
required for every two apts. if the num¬ 
ber of persons does not exceed eight. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

See Model Law. In bldgs, prior erected one 
water closet for two apartments. 

New Orleans, La. 

There shall be one water closet in separate 
compartment for each apartment, ventilated 
to the satisfaction of the Board of Health. 


Omaha, Neb. 

There shall be at least one water closet 
for every two apartments. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Same as Model Law except general toilet 
may be maintained in addition, and in apts. 
consisting of one or two rooms, toilet may 
be maintained for every 3 rooms. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law), 

There shall be a separate water closet in 
each apartment in a separate compartment 
from every other water closet and shall be 
enclosed with plastered partitions that ex¬ 
tend to ceilings. The floor shall be water 
proof; water proofing shall extend 6 inches 
up sides of walls. No water closet shall be 
maintained in cellar. 

Pittsburgh. Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 

A separate water closet in a separate 
compartment for each apartment required, 
in case of 2 room apartments there may 
be one water closet for 2 apartments. 

Several toilets may be maintained in one 
compartment in additional to above require¬ 
ments. Water closets prohibited in cellars. 

Providence, R. I. 

There shall be separate water closet in 
separate compartment within each apartment. 
Apartments of one or two rooms must have 
at least one water closet for every three 
rooms. 

Richmond, Va. 


Rochester, N. Y. 

Same as Model Law except for apartments 
of one or two rooms there shall be one 
water closet for every three rooms. 


95 





















































WATER CLOSET ACCOMMODATIONS —Cont’d 


St. I’nul, Minn. 

There shall be one water closet in sep¬ 
arate compartment for every three apts. of 
2 rooms and one for each apt. of 3 or more 
rooms. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Every apt. or tenement shall have at 
least one water closet located in a separate 


Baltimore, Mil. 

Every room .shall have 400 cubic feet air 
space for each person over 12 years and 200 
cubic feet for each person under 12. 

Boston, Mass. 

Board of (Health may by vote limit the 
number of persons living in any dwelling. 

_ Bridgeport, Co nn._ ^ 

Calgary, Can. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Chicago, Ill. 

There must be 400 cu. ft. air space foj 
adults and 200 cu. ft. for children under 12 
years. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

No room shall be over crowded. Adults 
must have 400 cu. ft. of air space; each 
child under 12, 200 cu. ft. 

Columbus, Ohio 

600 cu. ft. of air required in each room for 
each adult and 400 cu. ft. for each child un¬ 
der 12. 

Dayton. Ohio 

Adults must have 400 cu. ft. of air space 
and children under 12, 200 cu. ft. of air 
space. 

Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

500 cu. ft. of air required for each adult 
in sleeping rooms and 300 cu. ft. for children 
under 12. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Every tenement shall be maintained in 
good repair and in a cleanly condition. 

_Boston, Mass._ 

_Bridgeport. Conn._ 

_Calgary, Can,_ 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Owner of tenment must keep it clean and 
wholesome and every apartment adequately 
lighted and ventilated. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Must be kept clean and free from dirt. 
Owners must keep unoccupied apartments 
clean. 

_ Columbus, Ohio__ 

Dayton, Ohio 

Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Shall be kept clean and free from filth, etc., 
at all times. Owner responsible. Garbage 
chutes prohibited. 

Duluth, Minn. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Cellar walls and ceilings shall be white¬ 
washed or painted a light color at least 
once a year; also shaft or court walls. 

Boston, Mass. _ 

Bridgeport. Conn. 

Calgary, Can. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Cellar walls and ceilings shall be white 
washed or painted a light color. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Walls of shafts, cellars and courts shall 
be whitewashed unless painted with a light 
color. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Required on walls of courts and walls and 
ceiling of cellars, unless painted with light 
paint. 

Dayton, Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 


Detroit, Mich. 

Required on walls and ceilings of cellars 
and walls of courts and shafts, unless painted 
a light color. 


compartment. Any tenement or apt. having 
three or more rooms shall have one water 
closet accessible without passing through 
any bedroom. 

Toledo, Ohio 


Toronto, Can. 


Washington, D. C. 

Every tenement shall have water closet 
for each suite or for each four rooms. 

Worcester, Mass. 

A water closet and bath required in a 
compartment enclosed to ceiling, required in 
every apartment. 


OVERCROWDING—CUBIC AIR SPACE 
Duluth, Minn. 

Cellar walls and ceilings and all inner and 
outer walls of courts, if not of light colored 
material, must be whitewashed or painted. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

In case of overcrowding Board of Health 
may order number of persons sleeping in a 
room reduced so that each adult shall have 
400 cu. ft. of air space and each child under 
12, 250 cu. ft. of air space. 

Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell. Mass. 


_Mem.phis, Tenn._ 

Milwaukee. Wis. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

600 cu. ft. of air to each adult and 400 to 
each child under 12 is required. 

New Orleans. La. 


Ora alia. Neb. 

No room shall be occupied so that any 
adult shall have less than 400 cu. ft. of air 
space or any child under 12 less than 200 
cu. ft. of air space. 

_ Paterson, N. .T. __ 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

No room used for sleeping purposes shall 
be occupied by more persons than would give 
to each person over 12 years of age 400 cubic 
feet of air space, and to each 12 years or 
under 200 cubic feet of air space. When 
over crowding is found the Board of Health 


shall place a tin placard on the door of such 
room stating the number of persons it will 
accommodate and such room shall not be oc¬ 
cupied by more. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

There shall be 700 cu. ft. of air per room— 
400 cu. ft. for each person over 12 years and 
200 cu. ft. for each child under 12. 

Portland, Ore. 


Providence, R. I. 

Cubic air space to be regulated by Board 
of Health. 

Richm ond, Ya. _ _ 

Rochester, N. Y. 

600 cubic feet for each person in apart¬ 
ment, 600 cubic feet for each adult in a 
sleeping iroom, and 300 cubic feet for each 
child under 12 in sleeping room is required. 
It shall be unlawful for any person to rent 
an apartment to be occupied by a greater 
number than it can accommodate. 

St. Paul. Minn. 

There shall be 512 cu. ft. of air for each 
person over 14 years and 300 for each child 
under 14. 

_Seatt 1 e. Wa sh._ 

Toledo, Ohio_ __ 

__Toronto. Can._ 

Washington. D. I-'. 

There shall be 400 cubic feet of air for 
each person 10 years old or over. 

Worcester. Mass. 


CLEANLINESS OF BUILDINGS 
Indianapolis. Ind. 

Every tenement shall be kept clean and 
free from all accumulation of filth, garbage, 
etc. 

Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Ment.phis. Tenn. 


Milwaukee. AVis. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

ShaR be kept clean and free from dirt, ifilth, 
etc. Tenant shall keen his apts. clean: owner 
shall see that all other parts of bldg, are 
kept clean and in a sanitary condition. 

New Orleans, La. 


Omaha, Nel>. 


Paterson, N. J. 


Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Buildings, yards, courts, alleys and pass¬ 
ageways shall be kept clean and free from 
dirt, filth and garbage. The owner shall 
clean all parts of the building to the satis¬ 
faction of the Board of Health, and keep 
them clean at all times. The tenant shall 
keep his apartment in cleanly condition and 
no person shall put filth or garbage In 
shaft, court or yard. 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Every tenement shall be kept in good re¬ 
pair and shall be clean and free from any 
accumulation of dirt, filth, etc. 

_ Portland. Ore. _ 

Providence. R. I. 

Richmond. A T a. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Shall be kept clean in all parts at all 
times. Owner responsible. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Owner or agent held responsible for 
cleanliness of bldg. 

Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 

All parts of building must be kept free 
from loose rubbish and debris. 

Toronto, Can. 


Washington, D. C. 

Occupants must keep all parts of buildings 
and grounds clean and wholesome. 

Worcester, Mass, 


WHITEWASHING OF WALLS 
Duluth, Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Cellar walls and ceilings and walls of 
courts and shafts shall be whitewashed un¬ 
less painted a light color. 

Louisville, Ivy. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Memphis, Tenn. 


Milwaukee, Wis. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Required in courts unless painted a light 
color; may be in rooms upon request of 
Commissioner of Health. 

% 

New Orleans, La. 


Omaha, Neh. 


Paterson, N. J. 


Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Cellar walls and ceilings and walls of 
courts shall be whitewashed or painted a 


light color. It shall be renewed when re¬ 
quired by Board of Health. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Walls must be thoroughly cleansed and 
white washed whenever required by the De¬ 
partment of Health. 

Portland, Ore. 

Required in all shafts and courts unless 
painted a light color. 

Providence, R. I. 

Richmond, Va. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Toronto, Can. 

Washington, D. C. 

Worcester, Mass. 


96 

























































































Baltimore, Md. 

The bottom of all courts shall be paved 
with concrete. 

Boston, Mass. 

Courts, yards and areas shall be graded, 
drained and paved. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 


Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, Mass. 

Courts and yards shall ibe graded, paved 
and drained. 

Chicago, III. 

Court area and yards shall be properly 
drained 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Yards, courts and shafts must be thor¬ 
oughly drained. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Courts, areas and yards shall be graded 
and drained and when required by Health 
Dept, concreted. 

Dayton, Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 


Detroit, Mieh. 

Courts, areas and yards shall be graded 
and drained and paved when required by 
Health Officer. 


DIIAINAGE OF COURT AREA SAND YARDS 
Duluth, Minn. 


Indianapolis. Infl. 


Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Memphis, Tenn. 

Courts, shafts, yards and areas shall be 
concreted and drained. 

Milwaukee, Mis. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Courts yards and areas shall be graded so 
that water may drain into sewer or street. 
When required by Commissioner of Health 
they shall be concreted. 

New Orleans, La. 

All courts and yards shall be properly grad, 
ed, drained and paved to the satisfaction of 
Board of Health. 

Omaha, Neb. 

Shall be provided with sanitary drainage 
and graded or graded and paved as condi¬ 
tions may require the same in clean and 
sanitary condition. 

Paterson, N. J. 


Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

All courts, shafts and yards shall be pro¬ 
vided with sufficient drainage and paved 
with concrete. 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Tenement must have yards, areas, and 
courts drained into the sewer. 

Portland, Ore. 

Shafts, courts and areas shall be properly 
paved and drained. 

Providence, R. I. 

Tenement courts and yards shall be prop¬ 
erly graded and drained and paved to satis¬ 
faction of inspector. 

Richmond, Va. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

All shafts, courts, areas and yards shall 
be properly concreted, graded and drained 
and shall be connected with sewer. 

Seattle, Wash. 

Toledo, Ohio 

Areas and courts of 15 sq. ft. or more 
be drained. 

Toronto, Can. 

Washington, D, C. 

Owner must cause areas and yards to be 
properly graded, paved and drained. 

Worcester, Mass. 

Every inner court and area shall be con¬ 
creted, graded and drained. 


Baltimore, Md. 

(Required where there is a sewer in the 
street. 

Boston, Mass. 

Every building shall be connected with 
sewer if one is accessible, if not with a cess¬ 
pool. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Plumbing of every bldg, shall be inde¬ 
pendently connected with sewer unless 
otherwise permitted by Board of Bid. Com¬ 
missioners and Supt. of Sewers. 

Calgary’, Can. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Multiple dwellings shall not be built on 
street without sewers. 

Chicago, III. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

All tenements abutting on streets having 
seweirs shall be connected with same. Each 
building must have separate connection 
with sewer, except where one building is 
on the same lot in the rear of another. 

Columbus, Ohio 

No tenement shall be erected on any street 
unless city water and sewer are accessible. 

Dayton, Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 


SEWER CONNECTIONS 

Detroit, Mich. 

Multiple dwelling shall not be erected on 
any street unless city water and sewer are 
accessible. Each building shall be connect¬ 
ed with same before it is occupied. 

Duluth, Minn. 

Cesspools or privy prohibited. Every tene¬ 
ment shall have plumbing system connected 
with sewer before occupation. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Every tenement shall be connected with 
public sewer if it is within 100 ft. of house. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Lowell. Mass. 

Memphis, Tenn. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Multiple dwellings shall not be erected on 
any street unless there is city water and a 
sewer in such street. 

New Orleans, La. 


Omaha, Neb. 

Paterson, N. J. 

If sewer is accessible every tenement shall 
be connected before it is occupied. If it is 
within 150 ft. of public sewer a private sew¬ 
er shall be built connecting with it. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

All tenements shall be connected with 
sewer main if it is within 100 feet of 


house. Tenements hereafter erected shall 
not be inhabited until such connections are 
made or an approved private system is es¬ 
tablished. Tenements prior erected shall be 
connected to sewer main if accessible, but 
if not a septic tank shall be installed, sub¬ 
ject to approval of Board of Health. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Tenement shall be connected with sewer 
where Bureau of Health judges it possible. 

_Portland, Ore.__ 

_Providence, R. I._ 

_Richmond, Ya._ 

Rochester, N. Y. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Every tenement shall be connected with 
public sewer if such is provided; if not, 
drain pipes from buildings may be connect¬ 
ed with cesspools. 

_ Seattle , Wash._ 

Toledo, Ohio 

Cellars shall be connected with sewer 
where possible. 

Toronto, Can. 

Washington, D. C. 

Sewer connections are required. 

Worcester, Mass. 


Baltimore, Md. 


Boston, Mass. 

Owner shall provide water tight covered 
receptacles. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Calgary, Can. 

Tenement must be provided with approved 
refuse and garbage receivers to the satis¬ 
faction of the Sanitary Department. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Chutes prohibited. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Receptacles for ashes and garbage must be 
provided by the owner. One of each per 
story to every five persons. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Owners shall provide metal receptacles. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Owner shall provide proper receptacles. 
Chutes prohibited. 

Daytou, Ohio 

Chutes prohibited. 

__Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Owner shall provide proper covered recept¬ 
acle of nonabsorbent material. Chutes pro¬ 
hibited. 


ASHES AND GARBAGE 


Duluth, Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Owner shall provide suitable receptacles. 
Chutes are prohibited. 

Louisville, Ky. 


Low’ell, Mass. 


Memphis, Tenn. 


Milwaukee, Wis. 


Portland, Ore. 

Owner shall provide receptacles of incom¬ 
bustible material. 

Providence, R. I. 

Owners of tenements shall provide suitable 
receptacles for ashes, rubbish and refuse 
matter, satisfactory to Supt. of Health. 

Richmond, Va. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Owner shall provide receptacles. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Metal cans must be provided by each family. 
Owner shall provide a general can to re¬ 
ceive such waste as may be necessary. Chutes 
are prohibited. 

New Orleans, La. 


Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 


St. Paul, Minn. 

There shall be suitable receptacles for 
ashes and garbage, constructed of Incom¬ 
bustible material; interior garbage chutes or 
shafts leading to same shall not be permitted. 

Seattle, Wash. 

There shall be suitable receptacles for 
ashes, constructed of incombustible mater¬ 
ial. 

Toledo, Ohio 


Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Owner or tenant shall provide approved 
tight receptacles for ashes and garbage; 
chutes or shafts leading to them are pro¬ 
hibited. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Toronto, Can. 

Washington, D. C. 

Owner shall provide suitable places for 
reception of garbage and other refuse. 

Worcester, Mass. 


Baltimore, Md. 
Boston, Mass. 
Bridgeport, Conn. 
Calgary, Can. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 


JANITOR 


Columbus, Ohio 

Required to reside in and be responsible 
for tenement unless occupied by owner. 

_ _Dayton, Ohio_ 

_ Denver, Colo ._ 

Detroit, Mich. 

Required to reside in and be responsible for 
building in which owner does not reside, if 
Health Officer shall so require. 

Duluth. Minn. 


Indianapolis. Ind. 


Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Mem.phis, Tenn. 


Milwaukee. Wis. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Required in multiple dwellings in which 
owner does not reside. He shall have charge 
if required by Commissioner of Health. 


97 















































































New Orleans, La. 
Omaha, Neb. 


JANITOR—Cont’d 
Pittsburgh, Pa. 


St, Paul, Minn, 
Seattle, Wash. 


Paterson. N. J. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

In tenements, occupied by G families or 
more in which owner does not reside shall 
have a janitor who shall reside in the house 
and have charge of it, if the State Building 
Commissioner or Chief Building Inspector 
shall require it. 


Portland, Ore. 
Providence, R. I. 
Richmond, Va. 


Rochester, N. T. 

DRiequiired in tenement occupied by 8 fam¬ 
ilies or over unless owner resides in house. 
Janitor shall reside in and have charge of 
tenement. 


_ Toledo, Ohio_ 

Toronto, Can. 

Washington, D. C. 

Tenement with over five families where 
owner does not reside shall have janitor. 

"Worcester, Mass. 


PLUMBING 


_Baltimore. Md._ 

__Boston. Mass._ 

_ Bridgeport, Conn. _ 

Calgary. Can. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Shall not be enclosed with woodwork. 

Chicago, III. 

__ Cincinnati, Ohio _ 

Columbus, Ohio 
Dayton, Ohio 
Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Plumbing fixtures shall not be enclosed 
with woodwork. Pipes shall be exposed 
when required by Health Officer. 


Duluth, Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

In accordance with plumbing regulations 
of city. 

Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell. Mass. 


Mem.phis, Tenn. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

No fixture shall be enclosed with wood¬ 
work. Shall be sanitary in every particular. 

New Orleans, La. 

Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Shall be exposed except where passing 
thru floors. 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 


Providence, R. I. 


Richmond, Va. 


Rochester, N. Y. 



St. Paul, Minn. 

All plumbing fixtures must be set open and 
free from all enclosing woodwork. 

Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo. Ohio 


Toronto, Can. 


Washington, D. C. 
Worcester, Mass. 


Baltimore. Md. 


Boston, Mass. 

Permitted if sewer is not accessible. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Shall not be placed nearer than 20 ft. from 
any residence. 

__Calgary, Can._ 

_Cambridge, Mass._ 

Chicago, Ill. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Not permitted if sewer is accessible, must 
be 25 ft. from any building. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Prohibited in connection with tenements 
hereafter erected; permitted with those prior 
erected if sewer is inaccessible. 

_Dayton. Ohio _ 

Detroit, Mich. 


CESSPOOLS 


Duluth, Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Not permitted when sewer main 
ble. 

Louisville, Ky. 

is accessi- 

Lowell, Mass. 

Mem.phis, Tenn. 


Milwaukee, Wis. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Prohibited in connection with 
dwellings. 

New Orleans, La. 

multiple 

Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 

Prohibited unless absolutely necessary. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

When permitted they shall be in a yard 
and shall be covered with an iron cover 
flush with the ground. When it is located 


so as to be menace to health, the Health 
Department may order it moved or its lo¬ 
cation changed. 

_ Pittsburgh, Pa. _ 

Portland. Ore. 

Providence. R. I. 

Richmond. A r a. 

Rochester. N, Y. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Cesspools allowed where no sewer provid¬ 
ed, but no water closet shall be connected 
to a leaching cesspool. 

Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 


Toronto, Can. 


Worcester, Mass. 


Worcester, Mass. 



Baltimore, Md. 


Boston, Mass. 

Privy vaults shall be of brick and have 
capacity of 250 cubic feet. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 


Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, Mass. 


Chicago, Ill. 


Cincinnati, Ohio 

Each water closet shall have a separate 
compartment 2% by 4 ft. and 10 ft. high. 
Must be provided with lock. Must be prop¬ 
erly lighted and ventilated. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Privy vault permitted only in case of tene¬ 
ments prior erected, if sewer is not acces¬ 
sible. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Permitted when water supply is not avail¬ 
able. 


OUTSIDE TOILETS 


Denver. Colo. 


Detroit, Mich. 

Water closets shall not be placed out of 
doors. 


Dulnth, Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Not permitted when sewer main is acces¬ 
sible. 


Louisville, Ky. 


they are already maintained they may be 
retained where no sewer is available, if they 
are kept clean. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Portland, Ore. 
Providence, R. I. 


Richmond, Va. 


Lowell. Mass. 
Mem.phis, Tenn. 
Milwaukee, Wis. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Prohibited. 

New Orleans. La, 
Omaha, Neb. 


Rochester, N. Y. 


St. Paul, Minn. 

Must be cleaned at least once each year, 
or oftener if ordered by Commissioner of 
Health. 

Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 


Paterson, N. J. 


Toronto. Can. 


Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

In no case shall a privy vault be main¬ 
tained in houses hereafter erected; where 


Washington, D. C. 

Worcester, Mass. 


REQUIREMENTS AND REMEDIES—Vacation of Buildings. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Power given to Inspector of Bldgs, when 
bldgs, are dangerous to life and health. 

Boston, Mass. 

Building Commissioner may with written 
approval of the Mayor order vacation of 
building. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Power given to Board of Building Com¬ 
missioners in case of unsafe building. 

Calgary, Can. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

Supt. of Buildings may with written ap¬ 
proval of Mayor order vacation of any build¬ 
ing he considered unsafe. 

Chicago, Ill. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Board of Health may order any building 
vacated found to be in an unsanitary con¬ 
dition. 


Columbus, Ohio 

Power given to Health Dept. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Power given to Chief Inspector for dan¬ 
gerous bldgs. 

Denver, Colo. 

Power given to Building Inspector with 
approval of Commissioner of Safety. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Power given to Health Officer. 

Duluth, Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Board of Health shall order infected and 
unsanitary houses vacated. 

Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Mem.phis, Tenn. 

Power given to Building Commissioner. 


Milwaukee, Wis. 

Permitted when tenements are not ac¬ 
cessible to sewers. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

Power given to Inspector of Buildings. 

_ New Orleans, La. _ 

Omaha, Neb. 


_ Paterson, N, J. _ 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Power given to State Building Commis¬ 
sioner, or Chief Building Inspector, or local 
Board of Health, or State Department of 
Health. 

_ Pittsburgh, Pa .__ 

_ Portland, Ore. _ 

Providence, R. I. 


98 




















































































































REQUIREMENTS AND REMEDIES—Vacation of Buildings— Cont’d 


Richmond, Va. 

Power given to Bldg. Inspector whege 
bldgs, are unsafe or endanger life. 


Rochester, N. Y. 

The Bureau of Buildings may post order 
on dangerous building that same shall not 
be occupied until made safe. 


St. Paul, Minn. 

Power given to Commissioner of Health. 

Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 

Power given to Building Inspector. 


Toronto, Can. 

Power given to Inspector of Bldgs. 

Washington, D. C. 

Power given to Board of Condemnation of 
Unsanitary Bldgs. 


Worcester, Mass. 


UNLAWFUL OCCUPANCY 


Baltimore, Md. 


Boston, Mass. 

Building not permitted to be occupied until 
sufficient means of egress have been pro¬ 
vided. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 


Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, Mass. 

Building not to be occupied without permit 
of occupancy, Superintendent may order use 
or occupancy modified or building vacated 
till it complies with ordinance and so obtains 
permit. 

Chicago, Ill. 


Cincinnati, Ohio 

Shall be unlawful for any person to lease 
or permit to be occupied any building un¬ 
less such building is clean and sanitary. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Occupation of tenement house falling to 
comply with ordinance is unlawful. 


Dayton, Ohio 

Unlawful to occupy bldg, which does not 
comply with orders of Chief Inspector. 

_ Denver, Colo, _ 

Detroit, Mich. 


Paterson, N. J. 


Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Unlawful to occupy buildings vacated be¬ 
cause of violation of law, until made to 
comply with law. 


Duluth, Minn. 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

If building is occupied without certificate 
of aproval no rent shall be recoverable. 


Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 

Vacation of dangerous and unsafe bldgs, 
by Inspector of Buildings. 


Mem.phis, Tenn. 


Portland, Ore. 
Providence, R. I. 

Richmond, Va 
Rochester, N. Y. 
St. Paul, Minn. 


Milwaukee, Wis. 


Seattle, Wash. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Occupation without certificate of compli¬ 
ance is unlawful. 


Toledo, Ohio 
Toronto, Can. 


New Orleans. La. 


Washington, D. C. 


Omaha, Neb. 


Worcester. Mass. 


APPROVAL OF PLANS 


Baltimore, Md. 

Plans must be approved by Inspector of 
Bldgs, before work is begun. 

Boston, Mass. 

No construction or alteration shall be 
done without a permit, and such work shall 
be done in accordance with drawings ap¬ 
proved by Commissioner. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Plans must be approved before permit is 
given for work to be begun. 

Calgary, Can. 

Plans must be submitted and approved by 
Health Officer before work is begun. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

No work done except in accordance with 
drawings approved by Superintendent. 

Chicago. Ill. 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

Construction shall not begin until permit 
is issued. Permit issued by Commission of 
Buildings unless the building involves an 
excavation within 3 ft. of curb line then 
permit must be obtained from Director of 
Public Service to make such excavation. 


granted unless plans conform to provisions 
of City ordinances. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Plans must be approved by Health Officer 
before work can be begun. 

Dnlath, Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

Plans must be suomitted to Board of Health 
or Inspector of Buildings. 

Louisville, Ky. 

Lowell, Mass. 

Plans must be approved by Inspector of 
Buildings. 

Memphis, Tenn. 

Plans must be submitted to Building Com¬ 
missioner. 

Milwaukee, Wls. 

Plans must be approved by Inspector of 
Buildings before work is commenced. 

Minneapolis, Minn. 

No work on building commenced until plans 
are approved by Inspector of Buildings. 

New Orleans, La. 

Plans must be approved by City Engineer. 


Columbus, Ohio 

Plans must be approved by Building Dept, 
and where lighting, ventilation or sanitation 
is involved by Health Dept. also. 

Daytou, Ohio 

Plans must be approved by Division of 
Bldg. Inspection before work may be com¬ 
menced. 

Denver, Colo. 

Work not to be started without a permit 
from Building Inspector, which may not be 


Omaha, Neb. 

Shall be submitted to Building Inspector. 
Construction shall not start until permit is 
issued. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Unlawful to proceed with work on any 
bldg, until plans have been approved by In¬ 
spector of Buildings. 

Pennsylvania (Motlel Law). 

Plans must be submitted to the State 
Building Commissioner or Chief Building In¬ 


spector also to local Board of Health or 
State Department of Health. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Plans must be submitted and approved by 
Building Department before work is begun. 

Portland, Ore. 

No work to be begun without a permit. 
Application to Inspector of Buildings for 
permit must be accompanied by the plans. 

Providence, R. I. 

Plans shall be approved by Bldg. Inspector. 

Richmond, Va. 

Plans must be approved by Bldg. Inspec¬ 
tor before work is begun. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Plans must be approved by Building 
Bureau before work is commenced. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Plans must be submitted and approved by 
Commissioner of Public Works. 

Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 

Plans must be submitted and approved be¬ 
fore work is begun. 

Toronto, Can. 

Plans must be submitted and approved 
before work is begun. 

Washington, D, C. 

Worcester, Mass. 

Such plans as Superintendent of Public 
Buildings may require must be approved by 
him before permit is issued allowing work 
to be begun. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Every tenement must be inspected and 
certificate of approval given before same can 
be occupied. 

_Boston. Mass,__ 

_Bridgeport. Conn.__ 

Calgary, Can. 

Certificate from the Sanitary Inspector 
required before building can be occupied. 

Cambridge, Mass. 

No building shall be occupied until permit 
of occupancy has been issued by Superin¬ 
tendent. 

Building Department. 

Chicago, III. 

Owner must notify Commissioner of Build¬ 
ings when tenement is ready for lathing. 
Tenement must be inspected and if it con¬ 
forms to law, a certificate is issued. 

_ Cincinnati, Ohio _ 

Columbus, Ohio 

No bldg, occupied without a certificate of 
compliance from Building Dept. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Chief Inspector shall make or have made 
a final inspection of Bldg, and if it conforms 
to law shall issue certificate. 


CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL 
Denver, Colo. 

Detroit, Mich. 

Building shall not be occupied without cer¬ 
tificate from Health Officer that it conforms 
to requirements. 

Duluth. Minn. 


Indianapolis, Ind. 

No. building shall be occupied until the 
issuance of a certificate by the Board of 
Health. 

Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Memphis, Tenn. 

Milwaukee. Wis. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

No bldg, shall be occupied without a certifi¬ 
cate from Inspector of Bldgs, that it conforms 
to requirements. 

New Orleans, La. 


Omaha, Neh. 

Tenement shall not be occupied until certif¬ 
icate of approval is granted by Plumbing 
Inspector. 

Paterson, N. J« 


Pennsylvania vModel Law). 

Building shall not be occupied until per¬ 
mit authorizing its use be issued. 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Certificate of approval must be issued by 
Department of Public Health before occupa¬ 
tion. 

Portland, Ore. 

Inspector of Buildings shall inspect build¬ 
ing before occupation and if it conforms to 
law issue a certificate to that effect. 

_Providence, R. I._ 

Richmond, Va. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

No tenement shall be occupied until the 
issuance of certificate by Bureau of Build¬ 
ings that it conforms to the requirements. 

St. Paul, Minn. 


Seattle. Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 

Violations left to Inspector of Bldgs, to 
discover. 

_ Toronto. Can. _ 

__ Washington, D. C. _ 

Worcester. Mass. 


99 







































































REGISTRATION OP TENEMENTS 


Baltimore, Md. 

Every tenement and apartment house must 
'be registered as required by Inspector of 
Bldgs. 

Boston, Mass. 


Bridgeport, Conn. 


Calgary, Can. 


Cambridge, Mass. 


Chicago, Ill. 


Cincinnati, Ohio 


Columbus, Ohio 

Every owner of tenement house and lessee 
of whole house shall register in Health Dept, 
and also file a description of the property. 
Every owner, agent or lessee may file in the 
Dept, of Health a notice with his name and 
address or that of an agent of the house for 
purpose of receiving service of process. 

Dayton, Ohio 


Denver, Colo. 


Detroit, Mich. 

Every owner and lessee shall file name and 
address and description of property with 
Board of Health. Every owner, agent, or 
lessee may file with Board of Health notice 
with name and address of an agent of such 
house for purpose of receiving service of pro¬ 
cess. 

Duluth, Minn. 

Owner’s name must be registered with 
Health Department. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 


Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 


Memphis, Tenn. 


Milwaukee, Wis. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Every owner, agent, or lessee of a dwell¬ 
ing may file in Health Dept, name and ad¬ 
dress of agent of such house for receiving 
service of process, also a description of prop¬ 
erty. 

New Orleans, La. 


Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 


Pennsylvania (Model Law). 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Owner, lessee, or person having control of 
tenement house shall file name and address, 
name of authorized agent, description by 
street, number, number of apartments, rooms, 
families, etc. 

Portland, Ore. 


Providence, R. I. 


Richmond, Va. 


Rochester, N. Y. 


St. Paul, Minn. 


Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 


Toronto, Can, 


Washington, D. C. 


Worcester, Mass. 


Baltimore, Md. 

Pine $25 to $100 for each and every day. 

Boston, Mass. 

Fine not exceeding $500. 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Fine of not more than $100 upon convic¬ 
tion for each violation. 

Calgary, Can. 

Not over $50 and costs. 

_Cambridge, "Mass._ 

Chicago, Ill. 


Cincinnati, Ohio 

Fine of not less than $5 or moire than $500. 

Columbus, Ohio 

Not less than $5 nor more than $200 for 
first offense, and not less than $25 nor more 
than $500 for second offense and each subse¬ 
quent offense. Violation, after prosecution 
is begun shall be decreed a separate of¬ 
fense each week. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Fine of not less than $5 nor more than 
$500. Violation shall constitute a separate 
offense each day after notification. 

Denver, Colo. 

Fine of not less than $5 nor more than 
$300. Violation of each day shall consti¬ 
tute a separate offense. 

_Detroit, Mich.__ 

Duluth, Minn. 

Indianapolis, Ind. 

Every person guilty of violation of this act 
shall be punished by imprisonment for 10 
days for each day that violation shall con- 


PENALTIES 

tinue; or by fine of not less than $10 or not 
more than $100 if the offense is not willful, or 
if willful not mbre than $250. Any person 
assisting in the violation of this act shall 
pay a penalty of $50. 

Louisville. Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 

Fine not less than $10 nor more than $100, 
or imprisonment not exceeding 90 days. 

Mem,phis, Tenn. 

Fine of not less than $10 nor more than 
$50. Violation each day shall be decreed a 
separate offense. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Fine of not more than $100 or confinement 
in city workhouse for not more than 90 days, 
and upon failure to pay fine by confinement 
until such fine is paid. Each day’s contin¬ 
uance of violation shall be decreed a separate 
offense. 

New Orleans, La. 

$25 or 30 days’ imprisonment. 

Omaha, Neb. 

'Fine of not less than $10 nor more than $100 
for each day violation continues. 

Paterson, N. J. 

Fine of $50 or imprisonment of not more 
than 10 days for each and every violation. 
After first conviction person who continues 
to violate shall for each day be subject to 
fine of $25. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 

Any expense incurred by vacating author¬ 
ities in vacation shall be recoverable against 
owner. 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 

$10 to $100. After first offense for every 
week continuous fine of $10 to $100. In de¬ 
fault of payment of fine, term in county jail 
not exceeding 30 days. 

Portland, Ore. 

Fine not exceeding $500, or imprisonment 
of not more than 6 months or both. Viola¬ 
tion shall constitute a separate offense each 
day. 

Any part of building erected or altered in 
violation of code shall be torn down at ex¬ 
pense of those making the violation. 

Providence, R. I. 

$100 fine for first day of such offense; not 
exceeding $20 for each subsequent day such 
violation continues. 

Richmond, Va. 

For every violation and noncompliance 
respectively, fine of not less than $5 nor 
more than $100. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

Fine not exceeding $150 or by imprison¬ 
ment not exceeding 150 days or by a penalty 
of $500 to be recovered by the city in a civil 
action. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Imprisonment for three months or $500 
fine, or both. 

Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 

$5 to $100 or imprisonment. Each day a 
separate offense. 

_ Toronto, Can._ 

Washington, D. C, 

Worcester, Mass. 

Fine of not more than $100 for each viola¬ 
tion. 


ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT 


Baltimore, Md. 

Inspector of Buildings. 


Building 

Health. 


Building 


Boston, Mass. 

Commissioner and Board of 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Commissioner and Inspector. 


Calgary, Can. 
*Supt. of Buildings. 


Cambridge, Mass. 

Building Department. 


Detroit, Mich. 


Duluth, Minn. 


Indianapolis. Ind. 


Louisville, Ky. 


Lowell, Mass. 

Dept, of Bldgs, composed of Inspector of 
Bldgs, deputy Inspector of Bldgs., clerk, etc. 

Memphis, Tenn. 

Department of Building. 

Milwaukee, Wis. 

Inspector of Buildings. 


Chicago, Ill. 
Cincinnati, Ohio 


Columbus, Ohio 

Health and Bldg. Depts. 

Dayton, Ohio 

Chief Inspector of Division of Bldg. In¬ 
spection. 

Denver, Colo. 

Department of Building Inspection. 


Minneapolis, Minn. 

Inspector of Buildings, Dept, of Health. 
New Orleans, La. 

City Engineer and Police Department. 

Omaha, Neb. 


Paterson, N. J. 
Department of Buildings. 

Pennsylvania (Model Law). 


Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Department of Public Safety, Bureau of 
Health of each city. Bureau of Building In¬ 
spection of each City. 

Portland, Ore. 

Department of Buildings. 

Providence, R. I. 

Board of Health and Building Department 

Richmond, Va. 

Bldg. Inspector and in case of appeal the 
Board of Public Safety. 

Rochester, N. Y. 

The Bureau of Buildings. 

St. Paul, Minn. 

Commissioner of Public Works. 

Seattle, Wash. 


Toledo, Ohio 
Building Inspector. 
_ Toronto, Can, 

Washington, D. C. 


Worcester, Mass. 

Superintendent of Public Buildings. 


100 


























































Proposed Ordinances 

T HE following proposed Housing Ordinance for the City of St. Paul is 
the result of an intensive study of housing legislation in thirty-one cities 
and states throughout the country, and is based mainly upon the Codes 
of the State of Michigan and the City of Minneapolis. 

In the preparation of this Ordinance, the Director of the Survey secured the 
advice and co-operation lasting thru many days, of representatives from the 
Real Estate Board, the Builders’ Exchange, the Plumbers’ Association, archi¬ 
tects, the Building Inspector of St. Paul, the Building Inspector of Minneapolis 
and such others as were willing to give their services and were intelligently in¬ 
formed regarding the needs of St. Paul. 

The Housing Commission in giving its endorsement to this Ordinance by no 
means considers its provisions ideal, but in so far as precedent and interests of 
real estate owners and tenants, the powers of the City to enact legislation, and 
the available machinery for such enforcement are concerned this bill is consid¬ 
ered as nearly adequate as is possible under present circumstances. Wherever 
feasible this Ordinance is in accord with the provisions contained in the Hous¬ 
ing Code of the City of Minneapolis, especially on such matters as would pro¬ 
tect the real estate interests of St. Paul in competition with similar interests in 
the neighboring city. 


101 




































































































































































































Ordinances 


ORDINANCE NO. 

AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE CON¬ 
STRUCTION, ENLARGEMENT, ALTERA¬ 
TION, REPAIR, INSPECTION, MAINTE¬ 
NANCE, AND SAFEGUARDING OF BUILD¬ 
INGS, AND THE SAFEGUARDING OF THE 
HEALTH OF OCCUPANTS BY THE REGU¬ 
LATION OF SANITARY PROVISIONS AND 
THE PROTECTION OF REAL PROPERTY 
USED FOR DWELLING PURPOSES IN THE 
CITY OF ST. PAUL. 

The Council of the City of St. Paul does ordain: 

ARTICLE I. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS. 

Sec. 1. Title of the Ordinance. 

This Ordinance shall be known as the Housing 
Ordinance of the City of St. Paul, and shall apply 
to all dwellings and their surroundings. 

Sec. 2. Definitions. 

All words used in this Ordinance hereinafter de¬ 
fined shall be interpreted according to the letter of 
the definitions provided in this section. 

(a) Whenever in this Ordinance the present 
tense is used it shall include the future tense. The 
“masculine gender” shall include the feminine and 
neuter genders. The “singular number” shall in¬ 
clude the plural. The word “person includes an 
association, partnership or corporation as well as 
a natural person. The word “converted shall mean 
either a change of character in occupancy or in con¬ 
struction. The words “is occupied” applying to 
any building shall be construed as if followed by 
the words “or is intended, arranged, or designed to 
be occupied.” 

Whenever the word “shall” is used it shall be con¬ 
sidered as mandatory and not permissive. 

(b) “A dwelling” is to be construed as meaning 
any building or portion of building occupied, or in¬ 
tended to be occupied in whole or in part as a home, 
residence or sleeping place of one or more human 
beings, either permanently or temporarily. 

Sec. 3. For the purpose of this Ordinance 
dwellings are divided into the following classes: 

1. Private dwellings. 

2. Two family or duplex dwellings. 

3. Multiple dwellings. 

Classes of Multiple Dwellings. 

All multiple dwellings for the purpose of this Or¬ 
dinance shall be divided into two classes: Class 
“A,” and Class “B.” 


Class A. Multiple dwellings of Class A are 
dwellings which are occupied more or less per¬ 
manently for residence purposes by several fami¬ 
lies and in which the rooms are occupied in apart¬ 
ments, suites or groups. This class includes ten¬ 
ement houses, flats, apartment houses, apartment 
hotels, bachelor apartments, studio apartments, 
kitchenette apartments, and all other dwellings sim¬ 
ilarly occupied whether specifically enumerated 
herein or not. 

Class B. Multiple dwellings of Class B are 
dwellings which are occupied, as a rule transiently, 
as the more or less temporary abiding place of 
individuals who are lodged, with or without meals, 
and in which as a rule the rooms are occupied sin¬ 
gly. This class includes hotels, lodging houses, 
boarding houses, furnished room houses, club 
houses, convents, asylums, hospitals, jails, and all 
other dwellings similarly occupied whether specif¬ 
ically enumerated herein or not, except fire engine 
houses. 

(1) Hotel. A “hotel” is a multiple dwelling of 
Class B in which persons are lodged for hire and in 
which there are more than thirty sleeping rooms, a 
public dining room for the accommodation of at 
least fifty (50) guests, and a general kitchen. 

(2) Mixed Occupancy. In cases of mixed occu¬ 
pancy where a building is occupied in part as a 
dwelling the part so occupied shall be deemed a 
dwelling for the purposes of this Ordinance and 
shall comply with the provisions thereof relative to 
multiple dwellings. 

(3) Yards. A “rear yard” is an open unoccupied 
space on the same lot with a dwelling, between the 
extreme rear line of the lot and the extreme rear 
line of the house and extending across the entire 
width of the lot. A yard between the extreme front 
line of the house and the front line of the lot and 
extending across the entire width of the lot is a 
“front yard.” A yard between the extreme side 
line of the house and the side line of the lot and 
which extends from the front yard to the rear yard 
is a “side yard.” 

(4) Courts. A “court” is an open unoccupied 
space, other than a yard, on the same lot with a 
dwelling. A court not extending to the street or 
front or rear yard is an inner court. A court ex¬ 
tending to the street or front yard or rear yard is 
an outer court. 

(5) Corner and Inside Lots. A “corner lot” is a 
lot of which at least two adjacent sides abut for 
their full length upon a street. A lot other than a 
corner lot is an “inside lot.” 


103 


(6) Front, Rear, and Depth of Lot. The front of 
a lot is that boundary line which borders on the 
street. In case of a corner lot the owner may elect 
by statement on his plans either street boundary 
line as the front. The rear of a lot is the side op¬ 
posite to the front. In the case of a triangular or 
gore lot the rear is the boundary line not border¬ 
ing on a street. The depth of a lot is the dimension 
measured from the front of the lot to the extreme 
rear line of the lot. In the case of irregular shaped 
lots the mean depth shall be taken. 

(7) Public Hall. A “public hall” is a hall, corridor 
or passageway not within the exclusive control of 
one family. 

(8) Stair Hall. A “stair hall” is a public hall and 
includes the stairs, stair landings and those portions 
of the building through which it is necessary to 
pass in going between the entrance floor and the 
top floor. 

(9) Basement, Cellar, Attic, (a) A “basement” 
is a story partly underground but having at least 
one-half of its height above the curb level, and also 
one-half of its height above the highest level of the 
adjoining ground. A basement shall be counted 
as a story, except that a basement, the ceiling of 
which does not extend for more than five feet above 
the curb level or above the highest level of the ad¬ 
joining ground shall not be counted as a story. 

(b) A “cellar” is a story having more than one- 
half of its height below the curb level, or below 
the highest level of the adjoining ground. A cellar 
shall not be counted as a story for the purposes of 
height measurement. If any part of a story is in 
that part the equivalent of a basement or cellar, the 
provisions of this ordinance relative to basements 
and cellars shall apply to such part of said story. 

(c) In the case of private-dwellings and two- 
family-dwellings an attic, or story in a sloping roof 
shall not be counted as a story, except that no such 
attic shall contain a kitchen or dining room or be 
occupied for living purposes as the domicile of a 
family; the use of such attic shall be confined strictly 
to the use of the two families occupying the first 
and second floors of such dwelling. In the case of 
multiple-dwellings an attic shall be counted as a 
story. 

(10) Height. The “height” of a dwelling is the 
perpendicular distance measured in a straight line 
from the curb level to the highest point of the 
roof beams in the case of flat roofs and to the av¬ 
erage of the height of the gable in the case of pitched 
roofs, the measurements in all cases to be taken 
through the center of the front of the house. Where 
a dwelling is situated on a terrace above or below 
the curb level such height shall be measured from 
the level of the adjoining ground. Where a dwell¬ 


ing is on a corner lot and there is more than one 
grade or level, the measurements shall be taken 
through the center of the front or side on the street 
having the lowest elevation. 

(11) Curb Level. The “curb level” is the level 
of the established curb in front of the building 
measured at the center of such front. Where no 
curb has been established the city engineer shall 
establish such curb level or its equivalent for the 
purposes of this Ordinance. 

(12) Occupied Spaces. Outside stairways, fire- 
escapes, fire towers, porches, platforms, balconies, 
boiler flues and other projections shall be considered 
as part of the building and not as a part of the yards 
or courts or unoccupied spaces. This provision shall 
not apply to unenclosed outside porches not exceed¬ 
ing one story in height which do not extend into 
the front yard a greater distance than twelve (12) 
feet from the front walls of the building. A porch 
which does not extend into the side yard a greater 
distance than 6 feet from the side wall of the build¬ 
ing nor exceed 12 feet in its other horizontal dimen¬ 
sion, or to cornices not exceeding two (2) feet in 
width. A rear porch not exceeding six (6) feet in 
width shall be considered a part of the building to 
the extent of six (6) feet and in no case shall the 
excess over six (6) feet permit the shortening of the 
yard beyond the limits required in this ordinance. 

(13) Nuisance. The word “nuisance” shall be 
held to embrace public nuisance as known at com¬ 
mon law or in equity jurisprudence; and whatever 
is dangerous to human life or prejudicial to health; 
whatever dwelling is overcrowded with occupants, 
or is not sufficiently ventilated, sewered, drained, 
cleaned or lighted, in reference to its intended or 
actual use; and whatever renders the air or human 
food or drink unwholesome, are also severally, in 
contemplation of this Ordinance, nuisances; and all 
such nuisances are hereby declared prejudicial to 
the public health. 

(14) Private Garage. A private garage shall 
mean a structure providing accommodations for not 
more than four (4) automobiles and in no case shall 
such automobiles be used for other than private pur¬ 
poses, except that one such automobile may be de¬ 
voted to business purposes with the permission of 
the Building Inspector. 

Sec. 4. Buildings Converted or Altered. A 

building not a dwelling, if hereafter converted 
or altered to such use shall thereupon become sub¬ 
ject to all the provisions of this Ordinance relative 
to dwellings hereafter erected. A dwelling of one 
class if hereafter altered or converted to another 
class shall thereupon become subject to all the pro¬ 
visions of this Ordinance relative to such class. 


104 


Sec. 5. Alterations and Change in Occupancy. 

No dwelling hereafter erected shall at any time be 
altered so as to be in violation of any provision 
of this Ordinance. And no dwelling erected prior 
to the passage of this Ordinance shall at any time 
be altered so as to be in violation of those provi¬ 
sions of this Ordinance applicable to such dwelling. 
If any dwelling or any part thereof is occupied by 
more families than provided in this Ordinance, or 
is erected, altered or occupied contrary to the pro¬ 
visions of this Ordinance, such dwelling shall be 
deemed a nuisance, and the health officer shall cause 
such dwelling to be vacated. And such dwelling 
shall not again be occupied until it or its occupa¬ 
tion as the case may be, has been made to con¬ 
form to the provisions of this Ordinance. 

Sec. 6. Dwellings Moved. If any dwelling be 
hereafter moved from one lot to another it shall 
thereupon be made to conform to all the provisions 
of this Ordinance relative to dwellings hereafter 
erected except as to size and height of rooms and 
window area; provided, however, that no room in 
such dwelling shall be occupied for living purposes 
unless it shall have a window of an area of not less 
than eight square feet opening directly upon the 
street or upon a yard or court of the dimensions 
specified in this act relative to dwellings hereafter 
erected. 

Sec. 7. Dwellings Damaged. If a dwelling be 
damaged by fire or other cause to the extent of not 
more than two-thirds of its value, exclusive of the 
value of the foundations, such dwelling in being re¬ 
paired or rebuilt need not comply with the provi¬ 
sions of this ordinance relative to dwellings here¬ 
after erected. If damaged to the extent of more than 
two-thirds of such value, it shall not be repaired or 
rebuilt except in conformity with the provisions of 
this ordinace relative to dwellings hereafter erected. 
Where an estimate of damage to buildings is given 
by the inspector of buildings, an appeal to arbitra¬ 
tion shall be allowed to parties believing themselves 
injured or wronged by the estimate or decision of 
the inspector of buildings in any such case, as fol¬ 
lows : 

Any person desiring to make such appeal shall do 
so within fifteen days after written notice of the 
decision or order of the inspector of buildings shall 
have been given him. The request for arbitration 
shall be in writing, and shall state the object of the 
proposed arbitration and the name of the person 
who is to represent the appellant as arbitrator. 
The inspector of buildings shall thereupon state 
to the appellant the cost of such arbitration, and 
such appellant shall, within twenty-four hours from 
the time of filing the original request for arbitration, 
deposit with the inspector of buildings the sum of 


money required for defraying the expenses of the 
same, which sum shall in each case be fixed by in¬ 
spector in proportion to the difficulty and importance 
of the case, but shall in no case be more than the 
cost of similar expert service in the course of ordi¬ 
nary business of private individuals or corporations. 

As soon as such sum of money shall have been 
deposited with him, the inspector of buildings shall 
appoint an arbitrator to represent the city, who 
shall, together with the arbitrator appointed by the 
appellant, if they cannot agree, select a third arbi¬ 
trator, and the decision of any two of these arbitra¬ 
tors in writing shall, after investigation of the mat¬ 
ter in question, be final and binding upon the appel¬ 
lant as well as upon the city. 

The arbitrators themselves, before entering upon 
the discharge of their duties, shall be placed under 
oath to the effect that they are unprejudiced as to 
the matter in question and that they will faithfully 
discharge the duties of their position. They shall 
have the power to call witnesses who shall be placed 
under oath, and their decision or award shall be 
rendered in writing, both to the inspector of build¬ 
ings and to the appellant. 

The fee deposited by the appellant with the in¬ 
spector of buildings shall be paid by the inspector 
of buildings to the arbitrators upon the rendering 
of their report, and shall be in full of all costs in¬ 
cident to the arbitration; but should the decision of 
said board of arbitration be rendered against the 
inspector of buildings, then the money deposited by 
the aforesaid appellant shall be returned to him, and 
the entire cost of such arbitration shall be paid by 
the city. Provided, however, that whenever the 
decision of the inspector of buildings upon the safety 
of any building or part thereof or appurtenances 
connected therewith is made in a case so urgent, in 
his opinion, that failure at once properly to carry 
out his orders to demolish or strengthen such build¬ 
ing or part thereof or to alter or change any of the 
appurtenances connected therewith may endanger 
life or limb, the decision of the inspector of buildings 
shall be absolute and final. 

Sec. 8. Sewer Connection and Water Supply. 

The provisions of this act with reference to sewer 
connections and water supply shall be deemed to 
apply only where there is a sewer and water main 
in the street on which the dwelling is located, and 
which extend as far as the lot or plot of ground on 
which the dwelling is situated. 

Wherever there is no sewer in the street on which 
a dwelling is situated, but there is a water main, 
the required plumbing for the dwelling shall be 
connected to a cesspool at least twenty feet in depth 
and four feet by four feet in size, provided that the 
nature of the soil is such, in the opinion of the in- 


105 


spector of building's, that such cesspool can be made 
properly to take care of the sewage from said plumb¬ 
ing system. Wherever it is found by said inspector 
to be impracticable owing to the nature of the soil 
adjacent to said dwelling to construct such cesspool, 
a waterproof privy vault or other approved sanitary 
privy or similar device may be used temporarily for 
such dwelling until such time as a sewer is provided 
in the street adjacent to such dwellings. Whenever 
a sewer is so provided the owner of the dwelling 
shall at once install a plumbing system in the dwell¬ 
ing and connect it to the sewer. Cesspools shall be 
placed not less than twenty feet from the building 
whenever practicable. 

ARTICLE II. 

DWELLINGS HEREAFTER ERECTED. 

In this article will be found the provisions which 
must be observed when a person proposes to build 
a new dwelling or to convert or alter to such pur¬ 
poses a building which is not a dwelling. 

TITLE 1. 

LIGHT AND VENTILATION. 

Sec. 9. Percentage of Lot Occupied. No dwell¬ 
ing hereafter erected shall occupy, either alone or 
with other buildings, a greater percentage of the 
area of the lot than as follows: 

(a) In the case of corner lots with streets on 
three sides, not more than ninety per centum; 

(b) In the case of other corner lots, not more than 
eighty per centum; 

(c) In the case of inside lots, not more than 
sixty-five per centum. 

The measurements shall be taken at the ground 
level except that in the case of multiple dwellings 
where there are stores or shops on the entrance 
story, the measurements may be taken at the second 
story floor level, but in no case shall such pait stoiy 
be used for dwelling purposes. No measurements of 
lot area shall include any portion of any street. The 
measurements of lot area for the purposes of this 
section may be taken to the middle line of the alley 
where a public alley immediately abuts the lot at 
the rear or side and extends across its entire width 
or length, as the case may be. Any portion of a 
corner lot distant more than eighty feet from the 
outside side line of the lot, or from said side line 
extended in the same direction, shall be treated as 
an inside lot. The provisions of this section shall 
not apply to hotels. 

Sec. 10. Height. No dwelling hereafter erected 
shall exceed in height the width of the widest street 
upon which it abuts nor in any case shall it exceed 
six stories and basement nor seventy-five feet in 


height. Such width of street shall be measured 
from front lot line. Where a street borders a public 
place, public park or navigable body of water, the 
width of the street is the mean width of such street 
plus the width, measured at right angles to the 
street line, of such public place, public park or body 
of water to opposite front lot line. No dwelling 
shall hereafter be erected upon any street or alley 
less than thirty feet in width. The provisions of 
this section shall not apply to hotels. 

Sec. 11. Rear Yards. Immediately behind every 
dwelling hereafter erected there shall be, except as 
hereinafter provided, a rear yard extending across 
the entire width of the lot. Such yard shall be at 
every point open and unobstructed from the ground 
to the sky. Every part of such yard shall be directly 
accessible from every other part thereof. The depth 
of said yard shall be measured at right angles from 
the line of the extreme rear part of the dwelling 
toward the center of the rear lot line. In the case of 
an inside lot the rear yard space shall in no case be 
less than fifteen (15) feet deep, and five (5) feet 
additional for each story of the dwelling on said 
lot above the first. In case of a corner lot abutting 
on two streets, with no building facing the 
street upon which the lot abuts for the greater dis¬ 
tance, the rear yard space shall in no case be less 
than ten feet deep, and five (5) feet additional for 
each story of the dwelling on said lot above the first. 
In the case of a corner lot abutting on two streets, 
with one or more dwellings facing the street upon 
which the lot abuts for the greater distance, the 
wall farthest distant, or substantially parallel, to 
such street shall, for the purpose of this section be 
deemed the rear wall of such dwelling or dwellings 
and the yard space between such rear wall and the 
line of the lot parallel or substantially parallel, to 
such street shall in no case be less than six feet for a 
two story dwelling and three feet additional for each 
story above the second. In case of corner lots 
abutting on three streets, not counting the alley 
as a street, the rear yard need not extend across 
the full width of the lot, but only to its median 
line. Any portion of a corner lot distant more 
than eighty (80) feet from the corner line, shall 
be treated as an inside lot. A front yard may be 
of any depth. The foregoing provisions of this 
section shall not apply to hotels. 

Except that in the case of multiple dwellings of 
Class A hereafter erected known as “kitchenettes” 
in which the apartments are arranged in suites of 
not more than three rooms, kitchen and bath, and in 
which central heating and janitor service is furn¬ 
ished by the owner, the rear yard may be twenty- 
two and one-half feet in depth irrespective of the 
depth of the lot for a three-story dwelling and such 
depth shall increase three feet for each additional 


106 


story above three stories, but shall never be less 
than twenty-two and one-half feet. 

Sec. 12. Side Yards; Distance Between Adjoining 
Buildings. In order to insure adequate light and 
ventilation and reduce the conflagration hazard and 
preserve the amenities of residential districts, no 
dwelling hereafter erected shall approach nearer to a 
side lot line than as prescribed in this section. The 
space between any such dwelling and the side lot line 
shall be deemed a side yard and shall be as follows: 

(a) In the case of a dwelling hereafter erected one 
story in height such space shall not be less than four 
feet from the side wall of said dwelling to the side 
lot line. 

(b) In the case of a dwelling hereafter erected 
two stories in height such space shall not be less 
than five feet to the side lot line; if said dwelling is 
three stories in height, such space shall be not less 
than seven feet to the side lot line; and such space 
shall increase two feet in width for each additional 
story. 

(c) In the case of private-dwellings and of two- 
family dwellings hereafter erected, such space shall 
be not less than three feet from the side wall of the 
dwelling to the side lot line. Provided, however, 
that in no case shall the combined width of side 
yards for any such dwelling be less than double the 
width as prescribed in sub-division (a) and (b) of 
this section for a building of like height. 

(d) All of the above-mentioned side yards shall be 
at every point open and unobstructed from the 
ground to the sky, except as provided in subdivision 
12 of section 3 of this ordinance. 

Sec. 13. Courts. 

“Inner Courts” of all new apartment hotels, 
apartment houses, flat buildings, dormitories or ten¬ 
ement houses, as defined in this section, shall have 
minimum widths at every point, and minimum areas, 
as follows: 



Least width 

Least area 

Height of Court. 

in feet. 

in sq. feet. 

1 story 

6 

100 

2 stories 

8 

120 

3 stories 

10 

160 

4 stories 

12 

160 

5 stories 

14 

260 

6 stories 

16 

400 

7 stories 

20 

625 

8 stories 

24 

840 


The height of a court shall be the number of 
stories above the lowest story having habitable 
rooms with windows opening on to such court 
through its enclosing walls. 

“Outer Courts” of all new apartment hotels, 
apartment houses, flat buildings, dormitories, and 
tenement houses, as defined in this section, shall 


have minimum widths at every point, from the side 
walls of any such building, extending to the street 
or front yard or rear yard, equal to the following: 
Height of Building, Least width of 
Stories Court in feet. 


1 


2 


4 

4 

5 


3 


4 8 

5 8 

6 8 

7 8 

8 and over 8 


The length of a court shall never be greater than 
4 times its width. The width of all courts adjoining 
the lot line shall be measured to the lot line and not 
to an opposite building. 

“Inner Courts” of private dwellings and two fam¬ 
ily dwellings shall have a minimum width at every 
point from the side walls of any such building ex¬ 
tending to the street or front yard or rear yard 
equal to the following: 


On West and North side of lot: 

Least width of 
Stories. Court in feet. 



3 

3 

3 


On South and East side line of lot: 

Least width of 
Stories. Court in feet. 



5 

5 

7 


Sec. 14. Courts Open at the Top. No court of 
a dwelling hereafter erected shall be covered by a 
roof or skylight. Every such court shall be at 
every point open from the ground to the sky, except 
that in the case of multiple dwellings where there 
are stores or shops on the entrance story, the courts 
may start at the top of such entrance story and such 
courts may be roofed over by a skylight provided 
the skylight completely covers the court and is 
equipped with ventilators having a minimum open¬ 
ing equivalent to forty-four square inches for each 
story in the height of said court and also with fixed 
louvres having a minimum opening equal to the 
superficial area of said court, and such openings 
into said court, shall be kept open and unobstructed 
at all times. The provisions of this section as to 
courts starting from the ground shall not apply to 
hotels. 

Sec. 15. Air Intakes. In all dwellings hereafter 
erected every inner court extending through more 
than one (1) story shall be provided with a hori- 


107 


zontal air intake at the bottom. Such intake shall 
always communicate directly with the street or 
with the front yard or rear yard and shall consist 
of a passage way not less than three (3) feet wide 
and seven (7) feet high, which shall be left open, 
or be provided with an open gate at each end. 

Sec. 16. Angles in Courts. Nothing contained in 
the foregoing sections concerning courts shall be 
construed as preventing the cutting off of the cor¬ 
ners of said courts: Provided, that the running 
length of the wall across the angle of such corner 
does not exceed seven (7) feet. 

Sec. 17. Buildings on Same Lot With a Dwelling. 

If any building is hereafter placed on the same lot 
with a dwelling there shall always be maintained 
between the said buildings an open and unoccupied 
space extending upwards from the ground. If 
such buildings are placed at the side of each other 
the space between them shall conform to the pro¬ 
visions of section 12 of this ordinance relating 
to side yards, but shall be twice the minimum 
therein required. If such buildings are placed one 
at the rear of the other the space between them 
shall be the same as that prescribed in section 
eleven for rear yards. In all cases the height of 
the highest building on the lot shall regulate the 
dimensions. No building of any kind shall be here¬ 
after placed upon the same lot with a dwelling so 
as to decrease the minimum sizes of courts or yards 
as hereinbefore prescribed. No building shall 
hereafter be placed upon a lot so that there shall 
be a dwelling at the rear of another building on the 
same lot without a frontage on a street other than 
an alley. 

A private garage or private stable may be 
built at the rear of a lot on which there is a 
dwelling at the front. Such garage or stable shall 
not exceed two stories in height, and may have 
living rooms therein for the use solely of a house¬ 
hold employe, or member of his family, of the 
occupant of the dwelling on the front of the lot. 
If so occupied, the garage or stable in addition to 
complying with the provisions of this Ordinance 
shall have an entrance from the outside of the build¬ 
ing without passing through the garage or stable. 
In case of such garages which do not exceed one 
story in height, the depth of the rear yard shall 
be measured to the rear lot line, as the case may be, 
as provided in the Ordinance; but no such garage 
shall in any case approach nearer to the rear wall of 
the dwelling than fifteen (15) feet. In all other 
cases the rear yard shall be measured from the rear 
wall of the dwelling to the nearest wall of the build¬ 
ing at the rear of the lot. If any dwelling is here¬ 
after erected upon any lot upon which there is al¬ 
ready another building, it shall comply with the pro¬ 


visions of this Ordinance, and in addition the space 
between the said building and the said dwelling 
shall be of such size and arranged in such manner 
as is prescribed in this section, the height of the 
highest building on the lot to regulate the dimen¬ 
sions. 

Nothing in this section shall be construed as 
prohibiting the construction of garage as part of 
the dwelling. Any other structures on the rear of 
a lot shall be subject to the restrictions that apply 
to stables and garages. 

Sec. 18. Rooms, Lighting and Ventilation Of. 

In every dwelling hereafter erected every room 
shall have at least one (1) window opening direct¬ 
ly upon the street, or a public alley or other public 
space at least sixteen (16) feet in width, or upon 
a yard or a court of the dimensions specified in this 
Ordinance and located on the same lot, and such 
window shall be so located as to properly light all 
portions of such rooms. This provision shall not, 
however, apply to rooms used as art galleries, swim¬ 
ming pools, gymnasiums, squash courts or for 
similar purposes, provided such rooms are ade¬ 
quately lighted and ventilated. 

Sec. 19. Windows in Rooms. In every dwelling 
hereafter erected the total window area in each 
room shall be at least one-eighth (54) of the su¬ 
perficial floor area of the room, and the whole win¬ 
dow shall be made so as to open. This shall not 
prohibit the use of sliding sash. At least one (1) 
such window shall be not less than twelve (12) 
square feet in area between the stop-beads. In mul¬ 
tiple-dwellings the top of at least one (1) window 
shall be not less than seven (7) feet above the floor. 

Provided, however, that where an open porch ad¬ 
joins a room, one-half of the windows opening upon 
such porch may be considered as part of the total 
window area required for such room. 

Sec. 20. Rooms, Size Of. In every dwelling 
hereafter erected all rooms, efxcept water-closet 
compartments and bathrooms and pantries shall be 
of the following minimum sizes: Every room shall 
contain at least ninety (90) square feet of floor area 
except that kitchenettes may be fifty (50) square 
feet in area; no room except kitchenettes shall be in 
any part less than seven (7) feet wide. (In multiple- 
dwellings of Class A in each apartment, group or 
suite of rooms there shall be at least one (1) room 
containing not less than one hundred fifty (150) 
square feet of floor area.) 

Sec. 21. Rooms, Height Of. No room in a pri¬ 
vate dwelling or two-family dwelling hereafter 
erected shall be in any part less than eight (8) 
feet high from the finished floor to the finished 
ceiling, except that an attic room in such private 
and two-family dwelling need be but seven (7) 


108 


feet six (6) inches in but one-half of its area, but 
at no point less than four (4) feet in height. No 
room in a multiple-dwelling hereafter erected shall 
be in any part less than eight (8) feet high from 
the finished floor to the finished ceiling. 

Sec. 22. Alcoves and Alcove Rooms for Sleeping 
Purposes or as Separate Rooms. In every dwell¬ 
ing hereafter erected an alcove in any room shall 
be separately lighted and ventilated as provided 
for rooms in the foregoing sections. Such alcove 
shall be not less in area than as provided in sec¬ 
tion 20. No part of any room in a dwelling here¬ 
after erected shall be enclosed or subdivided at 
any time wholly or in part by a curtain, portiere, 
fixed or movable partition or other contrivance or 
device, unless such part of the room so enclosed 
or subdivided shall contain a separate window as 
herein required, and shall have a floor area of not 
less than is provided in section 20. 

Sec. 23. Privacy. In every dwelling hereafter 
erected, access to every living room and to every 
bedroom and to at least one (1) water-closet com¬ 
partment shall be had without passing through a 
bedroom. 

Sec. 24. Water-Closet Compartments and Bath 
Rooms, Lighting and Ventilation Of. In every 
dwelling hereafter erected, every water-closet com¬ 
partment and bath room shall have at least one (1) 
window opening directly upon the street, or upon 
a yard or court of the dimensions specified in this 
article, or if located immediately beneath the roof, 
a ventilating skylight, op6n to the sky with an 
opening not less than six square feet in area in 
each toilet, may be used in lieu of the windows 
required by this section. No such window shall 
be less in size than three (3) square feet between 
stop-beads, and the aggregate area of windows for 
each water-closet compartment shall be not less 
than six (6) square feet between stop-beads. Such 
windows shall be so located as to properly light all 
portions of such compartments. Every such win¬ 
dow shall be made so as to open in all its parts. 

“The above provision shall not apply to hotels 
that have a system of forced ventilation so con¬ 
structed as entirely to change the air in every bath 
room, toilet room or water closet compartment 
every fifteen minutes.” 

Sec. 25. Public Halls. In every dwelling here¬ 
after erected every public hall shall have at each 
story at least one (1) window opening directly 
upon the street or upon a yard or court of the 
dimensions specified in this article and located on 
.the same lot. Any part of a public hall which is 
offset or recessed more than five (5) feet or is shut 
off from any other part of said hall shall be deemed 


a separate hall within the meaning of this section, 
and shall be separately lighted and ventilated. 

Sec. 26. Windows and Skylights for Public Halls. 

In multiple-dwellings hereafter erected one (1) at 
least of the windows provided to light each public 
hall or part thereof shall have at least twelve (12) 
square feet or glazed area. 

Sec. 27. Windows for Stair Halls, Size Of. In 

every multiple-dwelling hereafter erected there 
shall be provided for each story at least one (1) 
window to light and ventilate each stair hall which 
shall have at least ten (10) square feet of glazed 
area. A sash door opening to the outer air shall 
be deemed the equivalent of a window in this and 
the two (2) foregoing sections, provided that such 
door contains the amount of glass surface pre¬ 
scribed for such windows. 

Sec. 28. Screens. Between the 15th of May and 
the 15th of October all windows of rooms used for 
human occupancy shall be provided by the owners 
with proper screens, and all windows and doors 
in halls and basements or cellars opening into the 
outer air shall also be provided by the owners with 
screens. Adequate screens should be so constructed 
and placed as to prevent ingress of flies, mosquitoes 
and other insects to the interior of the building. 
This provision shall not apply to windows and doors 
located above the fourth floor of any building. All 
barns or stables located within one hundred (100) 
feet of any dwelling which shall be used for the 
housing of horses or other animals shall also be 
provided with screens which would prevent the in¬ 
gress and egress of flies, mosquitoes and other 
insects. 

Sec. 29. Outside Porches. In dwellings here¬ 
after erected outside porches shall not be so locat¬ 
ed as to interfere with or diminish the light or 
ventilation required by this Ordinance. The term 
“outside porches” shall include outside platforms, 
balconies and stairways. All such outside porches 
shall be considered as part of the building, and 
not as part of the yards or courts or other unoccu¬ 
pied area. 

TITLE 2. 

SANITATION. 

Sec. 30. Cellar Rooms. In dwellings hereafter 
erected no room in the cellar shall be occupied for 
living purposes. 

Sec. 31. Basement Rooms. In dwellings hereafter 
erected no room in the basement shall be occupied 
for living purposes, except by the janitor of such 
dwelling and the members of his family. In addi¬ 
tion to the other requirements of this ordinance, 
such rooms shall have sufficient light and ventila- 


109 


tion, shall be well drained and dry and shall be fit for 
human habitation. 

Sec. 32. Cellars, Water-Proofing and Lighting. 

Every dwelling hereafter erected shall have a base¬ 
ment, cellar, or excavated space under the entire 
entrance floor at least three (3) feet in depth, or 
shall be elevated above the ground so that there 
will be a clear air space of at least twenty-four (24) 
inches between the top of the ground and the bot¬ 
tom of said floor so as to insure ventilation and 
protection from dampness. Such space shall in 
all cases be enclosed but provided with ample ven¬ 
tilation and properly drained. Every dwelling 
hereafter erected shall have all walls below the 
ground level and also the cellar or lowest floor 
damp-proof and water-proof. When necessary to 
make such walls and floors damp-proof and water¬ 
proof, the damp-proofing and water-proofing shall 
run through the walls and up the same as high as 
the ground level and shall be continued through¬ 
out the floors, and the said cellar or lowest floor 
shall be properly constructed so as to prevent 
dampness or water from entering. All cellars and 
basements in dwellings hereafter erected shall be 
properly lighted and ventilated. In every dwelling 
hereafter erected when the foundation, basement, 
or cellar walls are of poured concrete construction, 
forms shall be built on each side of such founda¬ 
tions or walls from the base to the top in order to 
insure uniform width. 

Sec. 33. Courts, Areas and Yards. In every 
dwelling hereafter erected, all courts, areas and 
yards shall be properly graded and drained, and 
when required by the health officer they shall be 
properly paved in whole or in part as may be 
appropriate. 

Sec. 34. Water Supply. In every dwelling here¬ 
after erected where water mains are accessible there 
shall be a proper sink or wash bowl with running 
water, exclusive of any sink in the cellar. In two- 
family dwellings and in multiple-dwellings of Class 
A there shall be such a sink or wash bowl in each 
apartment, suite or group of rooms. 

Sec. 35. Water-Closet Accommodations. In ev¬ 
ery dwelling hereafter erected there shall be a 
separate water-closet. Each such water-closet shall 
be placed in a compartment completely separated 
from every other water-closet; such compartment 
shall be not less than three (3) feet wide, and shall 
be enclosed with partitions which shall extend to 
the ceiling and which shall not be of wood or other 
absorbent material. Every such compartment shall 
have a window opening directly upon the street 
or upon a yard or court of the minimum sizes pre¬ 
scribed by this Ordinance and located upon the 
same lot. Nothing in this section contained shall 


be construed so as to prohibit a general toilet room 
containing several water-closet compartments sep¬ 
arated from each other by dwarf partitions, pro¬ 
vided such toilet room is adequately lighted and 
ventilated to the outer air and that such water- 
closets are supplemental to the water-closet accom¬ 
modations required by other provisions of this sec¬ 
tion for the tenants of the said house. No water- 
closet shall be placed out of doors. No water-closet 
fixtures shall be enclosed with any woodwork. No 
drip trays shall be permitted on any water-closet. 
No water-closet shall be placed in a cellar except 
with written permit from the health-officer unless 
it is an extra water-closet in a private dwelling 
and is well lighted and ventilated by a window to 
the outer air. In two-family dwellings and in 
multiple-dwellings of Class A hereafter erected 
there shall be for each family a separate water- 
closet constructed and arranged as above provided 
and located within each apartment, suite or group 
of rooms. In multiple-dwellings of Class B here¬ 
after erected there shall be provided at least one (1) 
water-closet for every fifteen (15) occupants or 
fraction threof. Every water-closet compartment 
hereafter placed in any dwelling shall be provided 
with gas or electric light for lighting the same at 
night unless no gas or electric light is available in 
such buildings. In two-family and multiple dwell¬ 
ings hereafter erected the floor of every such water- 
closet compartment shall be made water-proof with 
asphalt, tile, stone, terrazzo or some other non¬ 
absorbent water-proof material; and such water¬ 
proofing shall extend at least six (6) inches above 
the floor so that the said floor can be washed or 
flushed out without leaking. 

Sec. 36. Sewer Connection. No multiple-dwell¬ 
ing shall hereafter be erected on any street unless 
there is city water supply accessible thereto, nor 
unless there is a public sewer in such street, or a 
private sewer connecting directly with a public 
sewer, or a septic tank sewage disposal system ap¬ 
proved by the Health Office and every such multiple- 
dwelling shall have its plumbing system connected 
with the city water supply and with a public sewer 
before such multiple-dwelling is occupied. No cess¬ 
pool or vault or similar means of sewage disposal 
shall be used in connection with any dwelling where 
connection with a public sewer is practicable. 

Sec. 37. Plumbing. In every dwelling hereafter 
erected no plumbing fixture shall be enclosed with 
woodwork, but the space underneath shall be left 
entirely open. Plumbing pipes shall be exposed 
when so required by the health officer. All plumb¬ 
ing work shall be sanitary in every particular and, 
except as otherwise specified in this Ordinance shall 
be in accordance with the plumbing regulations of 
this city. 


110 


TITLE 3. 

FIRE PROTECTION. 

Sec. 38. Fireproof Dwelling, When Required. No 

dwelling shall hereafter be erected exceeding three 
stories in height, unless it shall be a fireproof dwell¬ 
ing; the building, however, may step up to follow 
the grade, provided no part of it is over three stories 
in height. 

Sec. 39. Means of Egress. Every multiple-dwell¬ 
ing hereafter erected exceeding one story in height 
shall have at least two independent ways of egress 
which shall be located remote from each other, and 
shall extend from the entrance floor to the top floor, 
and in the case of flat-roofed multiple-dwellings 
exceeding two stories in height shall extend to the 
roof. The stairs and public halls therein shall each 
be at least three feet six inches wide in the clear. 
The two ways of egress shall be flights of stairs, 
either inside or outside, constructed and arranged 
as provided in sections — and — of this act. In 
multiple-dwellings of Class A, except in kitchenette 
apartments arranged in suites of not more than three 
rooms, kitchen and bath, the second way of egress 
shall be directly accessible to each apartment, group 
or suite of rooms without having to pass through 
the first way of egress. In multiple-dwellings of 
Class B and in kitchenette apartments, as above 
described, the second way of egress shall be directly 
from a public hall. 

Sec. 40. Fire-escapes. All fire-escapes hereafter 
erected on multiple-dwellings shall be located and 
constructed as in this section required. Such fire- 
escapes shall be located at each story the floor of 
which is ten or more feet above the ground. Access 
to fire-escapes shall not be obstructed in any way. 
No fire-escapes shall be placed in an inner court. 
Fire-escapes may project into the public highway to 
a distance not greater than six feet beyond the 
building line. All fire-escapes shall consist of out¬ 
side open iron, stone or concrete balconies and stair¬ 
ways. All balconies shall not be less than three 
feet in width. All stairways shall be placed at an 
angle of not more than forty-five degrees to the 
horizontal wherever practicable and in no case to 
exceed fifty degrees to the horizontal, with flat open 
steps not less than seven inches in width and twen¬ 
ty-four inches in length and with a rise of not more 
than eight inches. The openings for stairways in 
all balconies shall be not less than twenty-four by 
seventy inches, and shall have no covers of any 
kind. The balcony on the top floor, except in the 
case of a balcony on the street or in the case of a 
peaked-roofed house, shall be provided with a stairs 
or with a goose-neck ladder leading from said bal¬ 
cony to and above the roof and properly fastened 
thereto. A drop or stationary ladder or stairs shall 


be provided from the lowest balcony of sufficient 
length to reach a safe landing place beneath. All 
fire-escapes shall be constructed and erected to sus¬ 
tain safely in all their parts a live load of one hun¬ 
dred and twenty pounds to the superficial foot, and 
if of iron shall receive not less than two coats of 
good paint, one in the shop and one after erection. 

Sec. 41. Roof Egress; Scuttles and Bulkheads. 

Every flat-roofed multiple-dwelling hereafter erected 
exceeding one story in height or occupied by more 
than two families on any floor, shall have in the 
roof a bulkhead or scuttle not less than two feet by 
three feet in size. Such scuttle or bulkhead shall be 
fire-proof or covered with metal on the outside. 
Every flat-roofed multiple-dwelling hereafter erected 
exceeding two stories in height shall be provided 
with stairs leading to such scuttle or bulkhead and 
easily accessible to all occupants of the building. 
Every two-story flat-roofed multiple-dwelling here¬ 
after erected having two or more families on any 
floor shall be provided with stairs or stationary 
ladder leading to such scuttle or bulkhead and easily 
accessible to all occupants of the building. No 
scuttle or bulkhead shall be located in a closet or 
room, but shall be located in the ceiling of the pub¬ 
lic hall on the top floor, and access through the same 
shall be direct and unobstructed. 

Sec. 42. Stairs. In multiple-dwellings hereafter 
erected all stairs shall be constructed with a rise of 
not more than eight inches and with treads not less 
than ten inches wide and not less than three feet six 
inches long in the clear, except that multiple-dwell¬ 
ings not exceeding two stories in height or having 
not more than two families on any floor, may have 
stairs with treads not less than three feet long in 
the clear. Winding stairs shall not be used. In 
multiple-dwellings hereafter erected exceeding two 
stories in height or occupied by more than two 
families on any floor, one of the stairways shall be 
constructed of fire-proof material throughout. The 
risers, strings and balusters shall be of metal, con¬ 
crete or stone. The treads shall be of metal, slate, 
concrete or stone, or of hardwood not less than 
one and one-half inches thick. Wooden hand-rails 
to stairs may be used if constructed of hardwood. 

Sec. 43. Stair Halls. In multiple-dwellings here¬ 
after erected exceeding two stories in height or 
occupied by more than two families on any floor, 
the fire-proof stairs required by the preceding sec¬ 
tion shall be enclosed on all sides with walls of brick 
not less than eight inches thick. The floors and 
ceilings of such fire-proof stair halls shall be of fire¬ 
proof construction. No wooden flooring shall be 
used. The doors opening from such stair halls 
shall be fire-proof, self-closing and shall open out¬ 
ward. There shall be no transom or sash or sim- 


lll 


ilar opening from such stair hall to any other part 
of the dwelling, except that such stair hall shall be 
shut off from all non-fire-proof portions of the public 
halls and from all other non-fire-proof parts of the 
building on each story by a self-closing fire-proof 
sash door with transparent wire-glass therein; on 
either side and above such door there may be fixed 
fire-proof transoms and sash with transparent wire- 
glass therein. 

Sec. 44. Entrance Halls. Every entrance hall in 
a multiple-dwelling hereafter erected shall be at 
least five feet six inches wide in the clear, and shall 
comply with all the conditions of the preceding sec¬ 
tions as to the construction of stair halls. In every 
multiple-dwelling hereafter erected, access shall be 
had from the street or alley to the rear yard either 
in a direct line or through a court or side yard. 

Sec. 45. Dumb-waiters, Elevators and Shafts. In 
multiple-dwellings hereafter erected all vertical 
shafts, whether for dumb-waiter, elevator or other 
purposes, shall be constructed of fire-proof material, 
with fire-proof doors at all openings at each story, 
including the cellar. In the case of dumb-waiters 
such doors shall be self-closing. No elevator shall 
be permitted in the well-hole of stairs, but every 
elevator shall be completely separated from the 
stairs by fire-proof walls enclosing the same. 

Sec. 46. Cellar Stairs. In multiple-dwellings of 
Class A hereafter erected which exceed two stories 
in height or which are occupied by more than two 
families on any floor, all inside stairs communicating 
between the cellar or basement, and the floor next 
above shall be of fire-proof construction with self¬ 
closing fire-proof door at the top and bottom and 
shall be enclosed with brick walls not less than eight 
inches thick; if located underneath the stairs lead¬ 
ing to the upper stories, the soffit of such stairs shall 
be covered with fire-proof material. 

Sec. 47. Closet Under First Story Stairs. In mul¬ 
tiple-dwellings erected no closet of any kind shall be 
constructed under any staircase leading from the 
entrance story to the upper stories, but such space 
shall be left entirely open and kept clear and free 
from encumbrance. 

Sec. 48. Cellar Entrance. In every multiple¬ 
dwelling hereafter erected there shall be an entrance 
to the cellar or other lowest story from the outside 
of the said building. 

Sec. 49. Wooden Multiple-dwellings. No wood¬ 
en dwelling to be occupied by more than one family 
shall hereafter be erected exceeding two-stories and 
attic in height. 

Sec. 50. Fire Walls. In a multiple-dwelling here¬ 
after erected where such multiple-dwelling is com¬ 
pletely divided into two or more parts by continu¬ 
ous fire walls and where such fire walls extend from 


the ground to a distance of two feet at all points 
above the roof of the building, and without any 
opening therein, each such part may be considered 
as a separate dwelling for the purposes of fire pro¬ 
tection. Wooden dwellings shall not be built con¬ 
tiguous to each other, and no such dwelling shall 
hereafter approach nearer to another building than 
provided in section .. of this ordinance. In non¬ 
fire-proof multiple dwellings hereafter erected, each 
five thousand superficial feet in ground area cov¬ 
ered by such multiple-dwelling shall be separated 
from the rest of such multiple-dwelling by fire-proof 
division walls. Such walls shall extend from the 
ground to a height of two feet above the roof. 
Standard fire-proof self-closing doors or fire-proof 
curtains may be installed in such fire-proof division 
walls. 

Sec. 51. Outside Stand-pipes Not Required. Out¬ 
side pipes shall not be required on buildings not 
exceeding three stories in height. 

ARTICLE III. 

ALTERATIONS. 

In this article will be found the provisions which 
must be observed when a person proposes to alter 
an existing dwelling. 

Sec. 52. Percentage of Lot Occupied. No dwell¬ 
ing shall hereafter be enlarged or its lot be dimin¬ 
ished, or other building placed on its lot, so that a 
greater percentage of the lot shall be occupied by 
buildings or structures than provided in section — 
of this act. 

Sec. 53. Yards. No dwelling shall hereafter be 
enlarged or its lot be diminished, or other build¬ 
ing placed on the lot, so that the rear yard or 
side yard shall be less in size than the minimum 
sizes prescribed in Sections Twenty-one (21) and 
Twenty-two (22) of this Ordinance for dwellings 
hereafter erected. 

Sec. 54. Height. No dwelling shall be increased 
in height so that the said dwelling shall exceed the 
height prescribed in section — of this act. 

Sec. 55. New Courts in Existing Dwellings. An 

inner court hereafter constructed in a dwelling 
erected prior to the passage of this Ordinance, if 
extending through not more than two (2) stories 
shall be not less than eight (8) feet by eight (8) feet 
in size; if it extends through more than two (2) 
stories it shall be not less than ten (10) by ten (10) 
feet in size. Every such court shall have an air 
intake as required for new dwellings in section — 
and shall be open to the sky without skylight, or 
roof of any kind. Where it is not practicable to 
construct such passageway a metal duct not less 
in area than three hundred square inches nor less 


112 


in its least dimension than twelve inches may be 
used. 

Sec. 56. Additional Rooms and Halls. Any addi¬ 
tional room or hall that is hereafter constructed or 
created in a dwelling shall comply in all respects 
with the provisions for “Rooms and Halls” in new 
building contained in this Ordinance, except that it 
may be of the same height as the other rooms on 
the same story of the dwelling. 

Sec. 57. Rooms and Halls, Lighting and Ventila¬ 
tion Of. No dwelling shall be so altered or its 
lot diminished that any room or public hall or 
stairs shall have its light or ventilation diminished 
in any way not approved by the health officer. 

Sec. 58. Alcoves and Alcove Rooms Used for 
Sleeping Purposes or as Separate Rooms. No part of 
any room in a dwelling shall hereafter be enclosed 
or subdivided wholly or in part, by a curtain, 
portiere, fixed or movable partition or other con¬ 
trivance or device, unless such part of the room so 
enclosed or subdivided shall contain a window as 

required by Sections - - 

and .'.of this Ordinance, and have 

a floor area as provided in Section-. 

Sec. 59. Skylights. All new skylights hereafter 
placed in a multiple-dwelling shall be provided with 
ridge ventilators having a minimum opening of 
forty (40) square inches and also with either fixed 
or movable louvres or with movable sashes, and 
shall be of such size as may be determined to be 
practicable by the health officer. 

Sec. 60. Water-Closet Accommodations. Every 
water-closet hereafter placed in a dwelling, except 
when provided to replace a defective or antiquated 
fixture in the same location, shall comply with the 

provisions of Sections . and 

. of this Ordinance, relative to 

water-closets in dwellings hereafter erected, except 
that in the case of a new water-closet installed on 
the top floor of an existing dwelling, a ventilating 
skylight open to the sky may be used in lieu of 
the windows required by Section . 

Sec. 61. Fire-proof Dwellings. No dwelling shall 
hereafter be altered so as to exceed three stories in 
height unless it shall be a fire-proof dwelling. 

Sec. 62. Fire-escapes. All fire-escapes hereafter 
constructed on any multiple-dwelling shall be lo¬ 
cated and constructed as prescribed in section — 
of this act. 

Sec. 63. Roof Stairs. No stairs leading to the 
roof in any multiple-dwelling shall be removed or 
be replaced ov a ladder. 

Sec. 64. Bulkheads and Penthouses. Every bulk¬ 
head and penthouse hereafter constructed in a mul¬ 
tiple-dwelling shall be constructed fire-proof or cov¬ 
ered with metal on the outside. 


Sec. 65. Stairways. No public hall or stairs in a 
multiple-dwelling shall be reduced in width so as to 
be less than the minimum width prescribed in sec¬ 
tions — and — of this act. 

Sec. 66. Dumb-waiters, Elevators and Shafts. All 
vertical shafts, dumb-waiters and elevators hereafter 
constructed in multiple dwellings shall comply in 
all respects with the provisions of section — of 
this act. 

Sec. 67. Alteration of Existing Wooden Multiple- 
dwellings. Except as otherwise provided in this 
article, no existing wooden multiple-dwelling shall 
hereafter be enlarged, extended or raised unless the 
alterations thereto comply with the provisions of 
this act for the erection of new dwellings. 

Sec. 68. Wooden Buildings on Same Lot with a 
Multiple-dwelling. No wooden building of any kind 
whatsoever shall hereafter be placed or built upon 
the same lot with a multiple-dwelling within the fire 
limits, and no existing wooden structure or other 
building on the same lot with a multiple-dwelling 
within the fire limits shall hereafter be enlarged, 
extended or raised. 

ARTICLE IV. 

MAINTENANCE. 

Sec. 69. Public Halls, Lighting at Night. In 

every multiple-dwelling a proper light shall be kept 
burning by the owner in the public hallways near 
the stairs upon each floor every night from sunset 
to sunrise throughout the year if so required by the 
health officer. 

Sec. 70. Water-Closets in Cellars. No water-closet 
shall be maintained in the cellar of any multiple¬ 
dwelling without a permit in writing from the health 
officer, who shall have the power to make rules 
and regulations governing the maintenance of such 
closet. Under no circumstances shall the general 
water-closet accommodations of any multiple¬ 
dwelling be permitted in the cellar or basement 
thereof; this provision, however, shall not be con¬ 
strued so as to prohibit a general toilet room con¬ 
taining several water-closets, provided such water- 
closets are supplementary to those required by this 
Ordinance. 

Sec. 71. Water-Closet Accommodations. In every 
dwelling existing prior to the passage of this Ordi¬ 
nance there shall be provided at least one (1) water- 
closet for every apartment, group or suite of rooms, 
except that in multiple-dwellings of Class B there 
shall be- provided at least one (1) water-closet for 
every fifteen (15) occupants or fraction thereof. 
No such water-closets shall be so located as to be 
accessible only through another room. This section 
shall be subject to the provisions of section 87 of 
this Ordinance. 


113 











Sec. 72. Basement and Cellar Rooms. No room in 
the cellar of any dwelling erected prior to the pas¬ 
sage of this act shall be occupied either for living 
or for sleeping purposes. No room in the basement 
of any such dwelling shall be so occupied without a 
written permit from the commissioner of health. 
No such room shall hereafter be occupied unless all 
the following conditions are complied with: 

(1) Such room shall be at least seven feet high in 
every part from the finished floor to the finished 
ceiling. 

(2) The ceiling of such room shall be in every 
part at least three feet six inches above the surface 
of the street or ground outside of or adjoining the 
same. 

(3) There shall be appurtenant to such room the 
use of a water-closet. 

(4) The lowest floor shall be water-proof and 
damp-proof. 

(5) Such room shall have sufficient light and ven¬ 
tilation, shall be well drained and dry, and shall be 
fit for human habitation. 

Sec. 73. Cellar Walls and Ceilings. The cellar 
walls and cellar ceilings of every multiple-dwelling 
shall by the owner be thoroughly whitewashed or 
painted a light color and shall be so maintained by 
him when required by the health officer. 

Sec. 74. Water-Closets and Sinks. In all dwell¬ 
ings the floor or other surface beneath and around 
water-closets and sinks shall be maintained in good 
order and repair. 

Sec. 75. Repairs. Every dwelling and all the 
parts thereof shall be kept in good repair, and the 
roof shall be kept so as not to leak, and all rain 
water shall be so drained and conveyed therefrom 
as not to cause dampness in the walls or ceilings. 

Sec. 76. Water Supply. Every dwelling where 
water supply is accessible or specified in the Ordin¬ 
ance shall have within the dwelling at least one (1) 
proper sink with running water furnished in suffici¬ 
ent quantity at one (1) or more places exclusive of 
the cellar. In two-family dwellings and multiple- 
dwellings of Class A there shall be a sink or wash 
bowl in each apartment, suite or group of rooms. 

Sec. 77. Cisterns and Wells. Where there is no 
city water supply accessible, there shall be provided 
one or more adequate cisterns or wells with a pump. 
Such cisterns or wells shall be of such size and num¬ 
ber and constructed and maintained in such manner 
as may be determined by the commissioner of 
health. The above requirements shall be subject to 
the provisions of section — of this Ordinance. 

Sec. 78. Catch-basins. In the case of dwellings 
where, because of lack of city water supply or sew¬ 
ers, sinks with running water are not provided in¬ 
side the dwellings, one or more catch basins prop¬ 


erly connected with a cesspool for the disposal of 
waste water, as may be necessary in the opinion 
of the commissioner of health, constructed in such 
manner as he may specify, shall be provided in the 
yard or court, level with the surface thereof and at 
a point easy of access to the occupants of such 
dwelling and at a distance of not less than 100 feet 
from any well. 

Sec. 79. Cleanliness of Dwellings. Every dwell¬ 
ing and every part thereof shall be kept clean and 
shall also be kept free from any accumulation of 
dirt, filth, rubbish, garbage or other matter in or 
on the same, or in the yards, courts, passages, areas 
or alleys connected with or belonging to the same. 
The owner of every dwelling, and in the case of a 
private dwelling the occupant thereof, shall thor¬ 
oughly cleanse or cause to be cleansed all the rooms, 
passages, stairs, floors, windows, doors, walls, ceil¬ 
ings, privys, water-closets, cesspools, drains, halls, 
cellars, roofs and all other parts of the said dwelling, 
or part of the dwelling of which he is the owner, 
or in case of a private-dwelling the occupant, to 
the satisfaction of the health officer, and shall keep 
the said parts of the said dwelling in a cleanly con¬ 
dition at all times. This section shall not be con¬ 
strued to require the owner to keep clean the individ¬ 
ual apartments of a two-family dwelling or a mul¬ 
tiple-dwelling of Class A, except where such apart¬ 
ments are unoccupied. It shall be the duty of each 
occupant to keep the portion of the dwelling occu¬ 
pied by him and over which he has control in a 
cleanly condition at all times. 

Sec. 80. Walls of Courts. In multiple-dwellings 
the walls of all courts, unless built of a light color 
brick or stone, shall be thoroughly whitewashed by 
the owner or shall be painted a light color by him, 
and shall be so maintained. Such whitewash or 
paint shall be renewed whenever necessary, as may 
be required by the health officer. Courts which are 
equivalent in width to the height of the buildings 
shall not be required to be painted or whitewashed 
in light color unless so required by the health officer. 

Sec. 81. Walls and Ceilings of Rooms. In all 

multiple-dwellings the health officer may require 
the walls and ceilings of every room that does not 
open directly on the street to be kalsomined white 
or painted with white paint when necessary to im¬ 
prove the lighting of such room and may require 
this to be renewed as often as may be necessary. 

Sec. 82. Wall Paper. Whenever required by the 
commissioner of health, all old wall paper shall be 
removed and the walls and ceilings thoroughly 
cleaned before being redecorated. 

Sec. 83. Receptacles for Ashes, Rubbish and Gar¬ 
bage. Suitable tight metal cans, with covers, for 
holding ashes, rubbish, garbage, refuse and other 


114 


matter shall be provided and maintained for every 
dwelling. In the case of private dwellings and two 
family dwellings such cans shall be provided by the 
occupant. In the case of multiple dwellings of Class 
A where there are janitors, each family shall provide 
its own cans, but the owner shall provide such gen¬ 
eral cans to receive such waste materials as may be 
necessary. Wherever the owner of a multiple 
dwelling of Class A provides individual cans, for 
each apartment, it shall be the duty of the occupant 
of such apartment to keep the cans used by him in 
a cleanly condition at all times. Garbage chutes 
and bins are prohibited, but this shall not be con¬ 
strued as prohibiting garbage incinerators, inside 
of chimneys, if properly constructed. 

Sec. 84. Prohibited Uses. No horse, cow, calf, 
swine, sheep, goats or chickens shall be kept in any 
dwelling or part thereof. Nor shall any such animal 
be kept on the same lot or premises with a dwelling 
except under such conditions as may be prescribed 
by the health officer. No such animal, except a 
horse, shall under any circumstances be kept on the 
same lot or premises with a multiple dwelling. This 
provision does not apply to dogs or cats unless such 
are kept for commercial purposes. No dwelling or 
the lot or premises thereof shall be used for the 
storage or handling of rags, junk, or any other ma¬ 
terial or substance subject to decay, which may be 
dangerous because of its odor, or because of the 
possibilities of harboring rats and other disease 
breeding or disease carrying animals. 

Sec. 85. Illegal Use. The Bureau of Health may 
prohibit the occupancy of multiple buildings or may 
order buildings vacated when in the opinion of such 
Bureau of Health one or more of the occupants are 
proved to be of immoral character, or where it has 
been proven that they are used for purposes of pros¬ 
titution or gambling, provided that prior to the issu¬ 
ing of the order compelling the vacation of such 
building or buildings the owner, his agent or rep¬ 
resentative has been notified of the existing condi¬ 
tions, and a maximum of 30 days has been granted 
to the owner, his agent or representative, during 
which to remove the offending occupant. 

Conviction in a Court in the City of St. Paul 
on the grounds of disorderly conduct, prostitution, 
or gambling on the basis of evidence gathered on 
the premises, shall be sufficient reason for the issu¬ 
ance of an order for vacation, and it shall be the 
duty of the Police Department of the City of St. 
Paul to report to the Bureau of Health all of such 
cases of immoral conduct, prostitution or gambling- 
found in any of the dwelling houses in the City of 
St. Paul, and upon which conviction has been se¬ 
cured in any court. 

Sec. 86. Combustible Materials. No dwelling, nor 


any part thereof, nor of the lot upon which it is 
situated shall be used as a place of storage, keep¬ 
ing or handling of any article so that it is dangerous 
or detrimental to life or health ; nor of any com¬ 
bustible article, except under such conditions as may 
be prescribed by the fire marshal under authority of 
a written permit issued by him. No multiple-dwell¬ 
ing nor any part thereof, nor of the lot upon which 
it is situated, shall be used as a place of storage, 
keeping or handling of feed, hay, straw, excelsior, 
cotton, paper stock, feathers or rags. 

Sec. 87. Bakeries and Fat Boiling. No bakery and 
no place of business in which fat is boiled shall be 
maintained in any non-fire-proof multiple-dwelling 
of Class A hereafter erected, and no bakery and no 
place of business in which fat is boiled shall here¬ 
after be installed in any non-fire-proof multiple¬ 
dwelling of Class A. 

Sec. 88. Certain Dangerous Businesses. There 
shall be no transom, window or door opening into a 
public hall from any portion of a multiple-dwelling 
where paint, oil, drugs or spirituous liquors a; e 
stored or kept for the purpose of sale or otherwise. 
This provision shall not apply to hotels. 

Sec. 89. Janitor or Housekeeper. In any multi¬ 
ple-dwelling in which the owner thereof does not 
reside, there shall be a janitor, housekeeper or 
other responsible person who shall have charge of 
the same, if the health officer shall so require. 

Sec. 90. Overcrowding. If any room in a dwell¬ 
ing is overcrowded the health officer may order the 
number of persons sleeping or living in said room 
to be so reduced that there shall be not less than 
six hundred (600) cubic feet of air to each adult 
and four hundred (400) cubic feet of air to each 
child under twelve (12) years of age occupying 
such room. 

Sec. 91. Lodgers Prohibited. The health officer 
may prohibit in any multiple-dwelling the letting 
of lodgings therein by any of the tenants occupying 
such multiple-dwelling, and may prescribe condi¬ 
tions under which lodgers or boarders may be taken 
in multiple-dwellings. It shall be the duty of the 
owner of all multiple-dwellings when notified by 
the health officer to see that the requirements of 
the health department in this regard are at all times 
complied with. The provisions of this section may 
be extended to private-dwellings and two-family 
dwellings, as may be found necessary by the health 
officer. 

Sec. 92. Infected and Uninhabitable Dwellings to 
Be Vacated. Whenever it shall be certified by an 
inspector or officer of the Board of Health that a 
dwelling is infected with contagious disease or 
that it is unfit for human habitation, or dangerous 


115 


to life or health by reason of want of repair, or of 
defects in the drainage, plumbing, lighting, ventila¬ 
tion, or the construction of the same, or by reason 
of the existence on the premises of a nuisance like¬ 
ly to cause sickness among the occupants of said 
dwelling, or for any cause, the health officer may 
issue an order requiring all persons therein to 
vacate such house within not less than twenty-four 
(24) hours nor more than ten (10) days for the 
reasons to be mentioned in said order. In case 
such order is not complied with within the time 
specified, the health officer may cause said dwelling 
to be vacated. The health officer whenever he is 
satisfied that the danger from said dwelling has 
ceased to exist, or that it is fit for human habita¬ 
tion may revoke said order or may extend the time 
within which to comply with the same. 

Sec. 93. Repairs to Buildings, Etc. Whenever 
any dwelling or any building structure, excavation, 
business pursuit, matter or thing, in or about a 
dwelling, or the lot on which it is situated, or the 
plumbing, sewerage, drainage, light or ventilation 
thereof, is in the opinion of the health officer in a 
condition or in effect dangerous or detrimental to 
life or health, the health officer may declare that 
the same to the extent he may specify is a public 
nuisance, and may order the same to be removed, 
abated, suspended, altered or otherwise improved 
or purified as the order shall specify. In addition 
to the above powers the health officer may also 
order or cause any dwelling or excavation, build¬ 
ing, structure, sewer, plumbing pipe, passage, prem¬ 
ises, ground, matter or thing, in or about a dwelling, 
or the lot on which it is situated, to be purified, 
cleansed, disinfected, removed, altered, repaired or 
improved. If any order of the health officer issued 
under the authority of the provisions of this Ordi¬ 
nance is not complied with, or so far complied with 
as he may regard as reasonable within fifteen (15) 
days after the service thereof, or within such shorter 
time as he may designate, then such order may be 
executed by said health officer through his officers, 
agents, employes or contractors. 

Sec. 94. Fire-escapes. The owner of every mul¬ 
tiple-dwelling on which there are fire-escapes shall 
keep them in good order and repair, and properly 
painted. No person shall at any time place any 
incumbrance of any kind before or upon any such 
fire-escape. 

Sec. 95. Scuttles, Bulkheads, Ladders and Stairs. 

In all multiple-dwellings where there are scuttles 
or bulkheads, they and all stairs or ladders leading 
thereto shall be easily accessible to all occupants of 
the building and shall be kept free from incumbrance 
and ready for use at all times. No scuttle and no 
bulkhead door shall at any time be locked with a 


key, but either may be fastened on the inside by 
movable bolts or hooks. 

ARTICLE V. 

IMPROVEMENTS. 

Sec. 96. Rooms, Lighting and Ventilation Of. 

No room in a dwelling erected prior to the passage 
of this Ordinance shall hereafter be occupied for liv¬ 
ing purposes unless it shall have a window of an 
area of not less than eight (8) square feet opening 
directly upon the street or upon a rear yard not 
less than ten (10) feet deep, or above the roof of 
an adjoining building, or upon a court or side yard 
of not less than twenty-five ( 25 ) square feet in 
area open to the sky without roof or skylight, un¬ 
less such room is located on the top floor and is 
adequately lighted and ventilated by a skylight 
opening directly to the outer air. 

Sec. 97. Public Halls and Stairs, Lighting and 
Ventilation Of. In all dwellings erected prior to 
the passage of this Ordinance the public halls and 
stairs shall be provided with as much light and 
ventilation to the outer air as may be deemed prac¬ 
ticable by the health officer, who may order the 
cutting in of windows and skylights and such 
other improvements and alterations in said dwell¬ 
ings as in his judgment may be necessary and ap¬ 
propriate to accomplish this result. All new sky¬ 
lights hereafter placed in such dwellings shall be 
in accordance with Section — of this Ordinance and 
shall be of such size as may be determined to be 
practicable by the health officer. 

Sec. 98. Sinks and Water-Closets. In all dwell¬ 
ings erected prior to the passage of this Ordinance 
the woodwork enclosing sinks and water-closets 
shall be removed and the space underneath said 
fixtures shall be left open. The floor and wall sur¬ 
faces beneath and around such fixtures shall be 
put in good order and repair. Defective and unsan¬ 
itary water-closet fixtures shall be replaced by 
proper fixtures, as defined by this Ordinance. 

Sec. 99. Privy Vaults, School Sinks and Water- 
Closets. Whenever a connection with a sewer is 
possible, all privy vaults, school sinks, cesspools, 
crock hoppers or other similar receptacles used to 
receive fecal matter, urine or sewage, shall, with 
their contents, be completely removed and the 
place where they were located properly disinfected 
under the direction of the health officer within 60 
days after notification of the Health Department. 
'Such appliances shall be replaced by individual 
water-closets of durable non-absorbent material, 
properly sewer-connected, and with individual traps, 
and properly connected flush tanks providing an am¬ 
ple flush of water to thoroughly cleanse the bowl. 


1 LG 


Each such water-closet shall be located inside the 
dwelling or other building in connection with 
which it is to be used, in a compartment completely 
separated from every other water-closet, and such 
compartment shall contain a window of not less 
than four (4) square feet in area opening directly 
to the street, or rear yard or on a side yard or court 
of the minimum sizes prescribed in Sections of this 
Ordinance. The floors of water-closet compart¬ 
ments shall be as provided in Section of this Ordi¬ 
nance. Such water-closets shall be provided in such 
numbers as required by this Ordinance. Such wa¬ 
ter-closets and all plumbing in connection there¬ 
with shall be sanitary in every respect and except 
as in this Ordinance otherwise provided, shall be 
in accordance with the local ordinances and regu¬ 
lations in relation to plumbing and drainage. Pan, 
plunger and long hopper closets will not be permit¬ 
ted. No water-closets shall be placed out of doors. 

Sec. 100. Basements and Cellars. The floor of 
the cellar or lowest floor of every dwelling shall be 
whenever necessary concreted with not less than 
three inches of concrete, cement or side-walk tile 
of good quality and with a finished surface. 

Sec. 101. Shafts and Courts. In every dwelling 
where there is a court or shaft of any kind, there 
shall be at the bottom of every such shaft and 
court a door giving sufficient access to such shaft 
or court to enable it to be properly cleaned out: 
Provided, That where there is already a window 
giving proper access it shall be deemed sufficient. 

Sec. 102. Egress. Every multiple-dwelling ex¬ 
ceeding one story in height shall have at least two 
independent ways of egress constructed and ar¬ 
ranged as provided in section 39 of this ordinance. 
In the case of multiple-dwellings erected prior to 
the passage of this act where it is not practicable 
to comply in all respects with the provisions of 
that section, the inspector of buildings shall make 
such requirements as may be appropriate to secure 
proper means of egress from such multiple-dwell¬ 
ings for all the occupants thereof. No existing fire- 
escape shall be deemed a sufficient means of egress 
unless the following conditions are complied with: 

(1) . All parts of it shall be of iron or other in¬ 
combustible material. 

(2) . The fire-escape shall consist of outside bal¬ 
conies which shall be properly connected with each 
other by adequate stairs or stationary ladders, with 
openings not less than twenty-four by twenty-eight 
inches. 

(3) . All fire-escapes shall have proper drop lad¬ 
ders or stairways from the lowest balcony of suf¬ 
ficient length to reach a safe landing place beneath. 

(4) . All fire-escapes not on the street shall have 
a safe and adequate means of egress from the yard 


or court to the street or alley on the adjoining 
premises. 

(5). Prompt and ready access shall be had to all 
fire-escapes, which shall not be obstructed by bath¬ 
tubs, water-closets, sinks or other fixtures, or in 
any other way. 

All fire-escapes that are already erected which do 
not conform to the requirements of this section may 
be altered by the owner to make them so conform 
in lieu of providing new fire-escapes, but no existing 
fire-escape shall be extended or have its location 
changed except with the written approval of the 
inspector of buildings. All fire-escapes hereafter 
erected on any multiple dwelling shall be located 
and constructed as prescribed in section 40 of this 
ordinance. 

Sec. 103. Additional Means of Egress. When¬ 
ever any multiple-dwelling is not provided with suf¬ 
ficient means of egress in case of fire, the inspector 
of buildings shall order such additional means of 
egress as may be necessary. 

Sec. 104. Roof Egress, Scuttles, Bulkheads, Lad¬ 
ders and Stairs. Whenever so required by the in¬ 
spector of buildings every flat-roofed multiple-dwell¬ 
ing exceeding two stories in height erected prior to 
the passage of this ordinance shall have in the roof a 
bulkhead, or a scuttle which shall be not less than 
two feet by three feet in size. All such bulkheads 
and scuttles shall be fire-proof or covered on the 
outside with metal and shall be provided with stairs 
or stationary ladders leading thereto and easily ac¬ 
cessible to all occupants of the building. No scuttle 
or bulkhead shall be located in a room, but shall be 
located in the ceiling of the public hall on the top 
floor, and access through the same to the roof shall 
be direct and unobstructed. When deemed neces¬ 
sary by the inspector of buildings scuttles shall be 
hinged so as to open readily. Every bulkhead in 
such multiple-dwelling shall have stairs with guide 
or hand-rail leading to the roof, and such stairs 
shall be kept free from incumbrance at all times. 
No scuttle and no bulkhead door shall at any time 
be locked with a key, but either may be fastened 
on the inside by movable bolts or hooks. All key¬ 
locks on scuttles and on bulkhead doors shall be re¬ 
moved. 

REQUIREMENTS AND REMEDIES. 

Sec. 105. Permit to Commence Building. Before 
the construction, extension or alteration of a dwell¬ 
ing, or the alteration or conversion of a building 
for use as a dwelling, is commenced, and before 
the construction or alteration of any building or 
structure on the same lot with a dwelling, the 
owner, or his agent or architect shall submit to the 
Building Inspector a detailed statement in writ- 


117 


ing, verified by the affidavit of the person making 
the same, of the specifications for such dwelling 
or building, upon blanks or forms to be furnished 
by the health officer, and also full and complete 
copies of the plans of such work. With such state¬ 
ment there shall be submitted a plat of the lot 
showing the dimensions of the same, the location 
of the proposed building and all other buildings on 
the lot. Such statement shall give in full the name 
and residence, by street and number, of the owner 
or owners of such dwelling or building and the 
purposes for which such dwelling or building will 
be used. If such construction, alteration, conver¬ 
sion or extension is proposed to be made by any 
other person than the owner of the land in fee, 
such statement shall contain the full name and 
residence, by street and number, not only of the 
owner of the land but of every person interested in 
such dwelling, either as owner, lessee or in any 
representative capacity. Said affidavit shall allege 
that said specifications and plans are true and con¬ 
tain a correct description of such dwelling, build¬ 
ing, structure, lot and proposed work. The state¬ 
ments and affidavits herein provided for may be 
made by the owner, or by the person who proposes 
to make the construction, alteration or conversion, 
or by his agent or architect. No person, however, 
shall be recognized as the agent of the owner, un¬ 
less he shall file with the Building Inspector a writ¬ 
ten instrument signed by such owner designating 
him as such agent. Such specifications, plans and 
statements shall be filed with the Building Inspec¬ 
tor and shall be deemed public records, but no such 
specifications, plans or statements shall be removed 
from the office of the Building Inspector. The 
Building Inspector shall cause all such plans and 
specifications to be examined. If such plans and 
specifications conform to the provisions of this 
Ordinance, they shall be approved by the Build¬ 
ing Inspector and a written certificate to that ef¬ 
fect shall be issued by him to the person submit¬ 
ting the same. The Building Inspector may, from 
time to time, approve changes in any plans and 
specifications previously approved by him, provided 
the plans and specifications when so changed shall 
be in conformity with this Ordinance. The con¬ 
struction, alteration or conversion of such dwell¬ 
ing, building or structure, or any part thereof, shall 
not be commenced until the filing of such specifi¬ 
cations, plans and statements, and the approval 
thereof, as above provided. The construction, al¬ 
teration or conversion of such dwelling, building 
or structure shall be in accordance with such ap-. 
proved specifications and plans. Any permit or ap¬ 
proval which may be issued by the Building In¬ 
spector but under which no work has been done 
above the foundation walls within one year from 


the time of the issuance of such permit or approval 
shall expire by limitation. The Building Inspector 
shall have the power to revoke or cancel any per¬ 
mit or approval in case of any failure or neglect 
to comply with any of the provisions of this 
Ordinance, or in the case of any false statement 
or misrepresentation is made in any specifications, 
plans or statements, submitted or filed for such 
permit or approval. 

Sec. 106. Certificate of Compliance. No build¬ 
ing hereafter constructed as or altered into a dwell¬ 
ing shall be occupied in whole or in part for hu¬ 
man habitation until the issuance of a certificate 
by the Building Inspector that said dwelling con¬ 
forms in all respects to the requirements of this 
Ordinance, or in the case any false statement 
Such certificate shall be issued within (15) days 
after written application therefor if said dwelling at 
the date of such application shall be entitled 
thereto. 

Sec. 107. Prohibited Occupation. If any build¬ 
ing hereafter constructed as or altered into a dwell¬ 
ing be occupied in whole or in part for human hab¬ 
itation in violation of the last section, said premises 
shall be deemed unfit for human habitation and the 
health officer may cause them to be vacated ac¬ 
cordingly. 

Sec. 108. Tenant’s Responsibility. If the occu¬ 
pant of a dwelling shall fail to comply with the pro¬ 
visions of this ordinance after due and proper 
notice from the Commissioner of Health, such fail¬ 
ure to comply shall be deemed sufficient, cause for 
the summary eviction of such tenant by the owner 
and the cancellation of his lease. 

Sec. 109. Registry of Owner’s Name. Every 
owner, agent, or other person having control of a 
multiple dwelling shall file with the Bureau of 
Health and the Building Inspector a notice contain¬ 
ing his name and address and also a description of 
the property, by street number or otherwise as the 
case may be, in such manner as the health officer 
shall prescribe. 

Sec. 110. Registry of Boarder or Roomer. When 
required by the health officer the owner, agent or 
lessee of a dwelling shall keep a registry of all 
boarders or roomers, boarding, living or rooming 
in any dwelling. Such registry shall be in such 
forms as may be prescribed by the health officer. 

Sec. 111. Inspection of Dwellings. The health 
officer or his duly authorized assistants or subordin¬ 
ates shall cause a periodic inspection to be made 
of every two-family and multiple-dwelling at least 
once a year. Such inspection shall include thorough 
examination of all parts of such dwellings and the 


118 


premises connected therewith. The health officer 
is also hereby empowered to make similar inspec¬ 
tions of all dwellings and the premises surrounding 
or adjacent thereto, as frequently as may be neces¬ 
sary and for this purpose shall have the right to 
enter in and upon all premises and dwellings at such 
time or times as he may see fit. 

Sec. 112. Enforcement. 1. Enforcement of all pro¬ 
visions of this act regulating the constructions of 
new buildings, the enlargement, alterations, and 
repair of existing buildings shall be under the ju¬ 
risdiction of the Commissioner of Parks, Play¬ 
grounds and Public Buildings. 

An Inspector of Buildings shall pass on all plans 
for construction, enlargement, alterations and re¬ 
pair of buildings, and shall inspect all such struct¬ 
ures from time to time during construction. 

It shall be the duty of the Building Inspector to 
keep a record of all buildings constructed, enlarged, 
altered or repaired with accurate information as to 
the time of construction, materials used, extent and 
character of buildings and of the cost of construc¬ 
tion. 

2. All provisions relating to the maintenance of 
buildings provided for in this ordinance should be 
under the control of the Bureau of Health and 
shall be enforced by the exercise of the police pow¬ 
ers vested in said department by the laws of the 
State of Minnesota, the City Charter, and the 
ordinances of the City of St. Paul. 

VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES—COURTS 
HAVING JURISDICTION. 

Sec. 113. Proceedings at Law. Whenever the 
Building Inspector is satisfied that any building or 
structure, or any portion thereof, the erection, con¬ 
struction or alteration, or repair of which is regu¬ 
lated, permitted or forbidden by this Ordinance, is 
being erected, altered, extended or repaired, in vio¬ 
lation of, or not in compliance with, any of the pro¬ 
visions or requirements of this Ordinance, or in 
violation of any detailed statement of specifications 
or plans submitted and approved thereunder, or of 
any certificate or permit issued thereunder, or that 
any provision or requirement of this Ordinance, or 
any order or direction made thereunder has not 
been complied with, or that plans and specifications 
have not been submitted or filed as required by this 
Ordinance, the Building Inspector may, in his dis¬ 
cretion through the Corporation Counsel, institute 
any appropriate action or proceeding, at law or in 
equity, to restrain, correct, or remove such viola¬ 
tion, or the execution of any work thereon, or to 
restrain or correct the erection or alteration of, or 
to require the removal of, or to prevent the occu¬ 


pation or use of, the building or structure erected, 
constructed or altered, in violation of, or not in 
compliance with, any of the provisions of this Ordi¬ 
nance; or with respect to which the requirements 
of this Ordinance or of any order or direction made 
pursuant to any provisions contained in this Ordi¬ 
nance, shall not have been complied with. 

In any such action or proceeding the City of St. 
Paul by the Corporation Counsel may, at the re¬ 
quest of the Building Inspector and on his affidavit 
setting forth the facts, apply to any court of record 
in said City, or to a judge or Justice thereof, for an 
order to enjoin and restraining all persons from 
doing, or causing or permitting to be done, any work 
in or upon such building or structure, or in or upon 
such part thereof as may be designated in said affi¬ 
davit or from occupying or using said building or 
structure, or such portion thereof as may be desig¬ 
nated in said affidavit for any purpose whatever, un¬ 
til the hearing and determination of said action and 
the entry of final judgment thereon. 

The Court, or Judge, or Justice thereof, to whom 
such application is made, is hereby authorized forth¬ 
with to make any or all of the orders above speci¬ 
fied, as may be required in such application, with 
or without notice, and to make such other or fur¬ 
ther orders or directions as may be necessary to 
render the same effectual. 

No officer of said Building Department, acting in 
good faith, shall be liable for damages by reason of 
anything done in any such action or proceedings. 

Sec. 114. Notice of Violation of Ordinance— 
Service of Papers. All notices of the violation of 
any of the provisions of this Ordinance and all no¬ 
tices directing anything to be done, required by this 
Ordinance, and all other notices that may be re¬ 
quired or authorized to be issued thereunder, in¬ 
cluding notice that any building, structure, prem¬ 
ises, or any part thereof, are deemed unsafe or dan¬ 
gerous, shall be issued by the Building Inspector, 
or the Bureau of Health as the case may be, and 
may be served by an officer or employe of the Build¬ 
ing Department, or the Bureau of Health, or by 
any person authorized by the said Departments. 

If the person or persons, or any of them, to whom 
said notice or order is addressed, should reside in 
the State of Minnesota and have no known place of 
business therein, the same may be served by deliv¬ 
ering to, and leaving with, such person or persons, 
or either of them, a copy of said notice or order, or 
if said person or persons cannot be found within 
said State after diligent search, then by posting a 
copy of same in manner aforesaid and depositing a 
copy thereof in a post office in the City of St. Paul, 
enclosed in a sealed wrapper addressed to said per¬ 
son or persons at his or their last known place of 
residence, with the postage paid thereon; and said 


119 


posting and mailing a copy of said notice or order 
shall be equivalent to personal service of said no¬ 
tice or order. 

Sec. 115. Penalty. Any person who shall violate 
any of the provisions of this ordinance relating to 
the construction, enlargement or alteration of build¬ 
ings, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon 
conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not 
more than One Hundred ($100.00) Dollars or by 
imprisonment for not to exceed ninety (90) days 
for each ofifense. 


Sec. 116. Time of Compliance. All improve¬ 
ments specifically required in this ordinance upon 
dwellings erected prior to the date of its enactment 
shall be made within one year from said date, or 
at such earlier period as may be lixed by the De¬ 
partment of Health, or by the Building or Fire De¬ 
partment of the City of St. Paul. 

Sec. 117. All regulations and ordinances incon¬ 
sistent with the provisions contained in this ordi¬ 
nance are hereby repealed, beginning April 1st, 1918. 
when this ordinance shall go into effect. 


i 




120 





















f 

















* 


























. 



























































I 


t 



























/ 



























I 





















































* ■ ■ ' 



















» 






. 




■ 




. 

. 










(Vy 










, 

. 























. 











. 








■ 





























































































' 






r 












































































• * 

* . 





















. 

ill 














■ 















































































* 

r 




































* 



























































































































